My early 2015 1st round picks for the Celtics

[The Rondo Show]

These are our picks and the players listed are who Ford has ranked during those slots. On the later picks I'll include the 2 players projected below and after our selection for an overall idea.


1st rd / 10-16 (16 if we make the playoffs and are the 7th seed, 15 if we are the 8th)

Winslow
Oubre
S. Johnson
Kaminsky
Portis
Booker
Pope

1st rd / 24

Poeltl
Rozier
Hollis-Jefferson
Wright
Dekker

2nd rd / 33

J. Anderson
N. Hayes
J. Martin
Wood
D. Johnson

2nd rd / 42

J. Jackson
J. Layman
T. Williams
Upshaw
McCullough


A lot of options, especially at SF.

We'll be participating in both the Orlando and Vegas summer leagues so it'll be really fun watching these picks play alongside Smart and Young (Olynyk too perhaps since we want to continue to give him reps).

I'd be very upset if we took Malik Pope

[jr_3421]

Out of the box prediction for us: Devin Booker SG Kentucky

I think he would fit seamlessly into our offense if he comes out and gives us better size and shooting at the 2.

[Future Celtics Owner]

I hope we draft:
Celts pick: Myles Turner
Clips pick: Cliff Alexander
76ers pick: Dakari Johnson

[Eddie20]

I hope we draft:
Celts pick: Myles Turner
Clips pick: Cliff Alexander
76ers pick: Dakari Johnson

High ceiling with the first two, Johnson's upside isn't as high. It isn't inconceivable to think Alexander slips to the early second round.

All upside picks...

(ours) Turner
(Clips) Hollis-Jefferson
(Sixers) Alexander
(our 2nd) Upshaw

[Future Celtics Owner]

Out of the box prediction for us: Devin Booker SG Kentucky

I think he would fit seamlessly into our offense if he comes out and gives us better size and shooting at the 2.

I think James Young is a better prospect.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Our pick:
Here is who I like in order
1.) Turner - love the upside
2.) Stanley Johnson - I doubt he falls this far, but it would be cool
3.) Winslow, Oubre or Looney falling here
4.) Portis - so we trade Sully

Clips Pick:
1.) I'm warming up to Sam Dekker - he averaged the same amount of points Haywood did his freshman year, has great size and I'm hoping that Stevens can basketball muse him into a good player.  That late in the draft, it's worth a shot.
2.) Jacob Poetl - great size, great tournament game yesterday
3.) Justin Anderson - he's been hurt and people are overreacting to it, he has potential long term if he gets his confidence back

76ers pick: Aleksandar Vezenkov - I like him more than anybody after 17th in the draft and he will be drafted like 35th.  He looks really good.  I'd also be ok with Upshaw or George Lucas.

[tazzmaniac]

Just read over the thread and I got some comments

1. Harrell is a good player but what is his upside? We need players who could some day end up being elite. Drafting a 21 year old 6'6 pf doesn't really have huge upside. If he's available with the Clippers pick we should take him but our pick is too early.

2. I think Kaminsky is a solid player but if he is the best player available we need to trade up. If we pick at 16 I would prefer Portis to Kaminsky but I think we need to go big either way and a good floor spacing big would help.

3. Someone compared Myles Turner to Thabeet. Turner has the chance to be a great shot blocker but he also is extremely skilled. If Thabeet had Turner's offensive game he wouldn't have been a bust.

4. I agree that WCS could drop since I doubt the Jazz, Philly, and Detroit pick a center and there should be 3 or 4 centers drafted ahead of WCS so maybe he slips. However, we will still need to trade up to at latest the 8-10 pick in order to draft him.

5. LaVert or RHJ would both be great picks with the Clippers pick.

I'm going to say the C's trade up to grab WCS, and then get LaVert or RHJ with the Clippers pick (or we trade the clippers pick and trade two of our seconds to move up and grab one of those guys).

-Turner to Thabeet comparison is good.  Just not that mobile, agile on the court.  Turner can move a little better but he has a strange running technique that imo will result in injuries sooner or later. Again he does not fit with CBS system overall, only for specific situations (Against Hibbert). But as of late we are making the opposing teams follow our lead (go small)

-  Harrell is not 6'6.  He matched up against Brice Johnson last week and he was only a tad shorter. Brice Johnson is 6'9. Harrell is 6'8

- Everyone want the Celts to move up in the draft. How easy is that? When was the last time anyone can remember a team able to move up to top 5 having a 14th pick for example? bc of the way the salary cap/structure is these days, picks are very valuable to keep/develop

Turner is a big who can block shots and step out and hit the 3. That sounds like a perfect fit for Steven's system. Turner probably won't be ready to play away but he has a ton more potential than Harrell and we need to swing for the fences in the draft because we don't need depth.

Draft Express has Harrell as 6'6.5 in shoes. (6'5 w/o shoes) He's certainly not 6'8.

I agree that we won't move into the top 5 but there have been a bunch of trades where a team moves up into the 8-12 range (Chicago moved up last year)

If Harrell is only 6'7 then thats ok still. He has a long wingspan, 8'11 reach and is explosive off the ground.   
Blake Griffin is only 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. Faried only 6'7 with 6'11 wingspan.   

Harrell is a more explosive , intense version of Brandon Bass.  Brandon Bass has fit really well under CBS system.

We would not be grabbing Harrell to be a center but he could guard centers occasionally (like Crowder , due to his strength, won't give up position easily), depending what CBS wants to do out on the floor.   

IF Bass is not brought back, Harrell could fill in that mobile, athletic , ability to guard multiple position pf role and provide even more intensity.

I think Faried is a good comp for Harrell. But Harrell's lack of shooting would give you the same spacing problem Faried does for the Nuggets. As to the blake Griffin comparison, Blake is 6'8.5 with out shoes, Harrell is 6'5.5 without shoes. Harrell hasn't given the indication that he will ever be able to shoot like Bass.

Regardless, I don't think you draft a junior who is already what he will be long term vs a player with a higher ceiling (unless the Junior fits a need). We need the player with the higher ceiling. I don't agree that Harrell fits Steven's system either.

I'm not sure what your basing on what kind of player fits CBS system. But from what i have seen, he tends to like playing players who are tough, works extremely hard, versatile defender/guard multiple positions, able to run end to end  on multiple occasions between whistles, good bbiq.   Able to make the open jump shots is nice also

Harrell outside of ability to make jump shot on a consistent basis (he has improved though, and more willing to shoot it then in the past) meets all the other criteria I listed above.   He is also explosive and is a capable rim protector.   

So tell me, why wouldn't he fit under CBS system?  or does he not fit in with what your looking for?

To me Stevens system likes position versatility, floor spacing and ball handlers.

Harrell is an undersized 4 in the NBA. I don't think you can have him guard anything but 4's in the NBA. So I don't see any positional versatility. He isn't a very good shooter so you won't see him space the floor much and he doesn't have any perimeter ball handling skills.

Stevens likes to go small, when he goes small he usually has lineup that consist of 5 shooters or 4 shooters and one big. Harrell can't be in the 5 shooter lineups because he can't shoot, and if you are playing him as your only big, he won't be able to protect the rim like you would want in that lineup.

A good comp for why he wouldn't succeed is Thomas Robinson. 4's that can't either shoot or block shots aren't succeeding as anything more than back ups in todays NBA.

I like him Harrell just not with our first pick because he doesn't have the upside because of his lack of size and age.

I disagree with many of your points. I have watched several Louisville last and this season games and Harrell can defend more than one position. He is all over the court some games.  See the link below from 6:39. He can guard sfs and keep up even with some guards out on the perimeter. He has good lateral quickness.  He is a strong kid and also will make it tough for some centers to gain inside position. Willing to battle on the inside.

The problem with that statement is that he's doing it on the college level. Covering big college stiffs is a far cry from how that'll translate to the next level.

You seem to be all over the place with your player likes, so I can't quite figure you out. However, the one common denominator is that you seem very keen on college basketball stats/production and thinking that means it'll translate on the next level. For me, I'd much rather take the young 18-19 year old freshman with upside, rather than the 21-22 year old (like your guys Kaminsky, Harrell, etc.) with a limited ceiling.

You'd rather have Kaminsky ahead of Turner and Harrell ahead of say, Cliff Alexander, but imagine for a second what those younger players would be doing on the college level at the same age as Kaminsky and Harrell.

but those players haven't. And we don't know if they will.

I value the proof of hard work and accomplishments more than "potential". How many guys with off the charts potential ever reach it??  Russell Westbrook is the last guy I can think of that didn't accomplish much in college to become a star in the NBA.

Would you draft Perry Jones over Jae Crowder?  Jeremy Lamb over Marcus Smart?

something to think about

Those are strange comparisons.  How about these?  Would you draft Embiid over Smart?  The Greek Freak over Olynyk?  The correct answer is everyday and twice on Sunday.

For teams that have mediocre talent at best, the draft should be all about taking the best player available.  NBA readiness, system fit, etc should be tertiary considerations.  The potential for getting a star is worth the risk of a draft pick bust.  Freshman and sophomores drafted for their potential are relatively speaking much more likely to succeed in the NBA than more accomplished juniors and seniors.

That's the sort of thinking that led to freshman Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being selected over junior Damien Lillard.  Or freshman Tyreke Evans and sophomore Jonny Flynn over junior Stephan Curry.

Mike

No, not exactly. Don't you find it ironic that both the players you mentioned (Lillard and Curry) played in smaller schools against weaker competition?

Who did the Greek Freak play against?

And if you need more evidence...

2011 NBA Draft.

#4 Tristan Thompson, freshman from Texas.
#11 Klay Thompson, junior from Washington State.
#16 Nikola Vucevic, junior from USC.

And don't forget...

#30 Jimmy Butler, senior from Marquette.

It's true that great players tend to leave school earlier now.  But plenty of guys who turn out to be busts or average NBA players also leave school earlier as well.

Mike

As I stated before, Ainge should have taken the Greek Freak over KO.  He took the safe accomplished but modest potential player over the raw high potential player who played in a lesser Euro league.  It is exactly the kind of move that I don't want Ainge to make in this draft.
 

What has the greek freak accomplished so far? Danny saw him live before skipping on him on draft night . so did 12-13 other gms.   I like parts of the greek freaks game but he has some major holes. As does KO.  To say he was clearly better pick, nobody knows that yet. 

And like i have stated earlier a freshman considered in the top 5-7 level talent is not the same as a freshman in the 12-17 or 20-30 pick levels.  If the celts are picking 12-15, i rather pick an accomplished sophomore/junior vs a freshman that didnt accomplish much but is considered highly regarded bc he has a 7'5 wingspan. Like Myles Turner

There is a very short list of freshmen picked in the 12-30 areas that have managed to have  successful careers in the nba.

The Greek Freak has accomplished a lot.  He was a very raw talent projected as a late lottery/mid first pick.  He jumped directly from a lesser Euro league to the NBA and in 2 seasons has established himself as a solid NBA starter.  He shows future All-Star potential and won't turn 21 until December.  KO turns 24 next month.  He hasn't established himself as a starter and may just end up as a solid bench player.    If a straight up trade of KO for the Greek Freak presented itself, are you saying you wouldn't make it? 

I'm not sold on Turner's potential yet but Kaminsky's accomplishments (good senior year, decent junior) don't impress me much.  Very few major college seniors accomplish much in the NBA.  Personally I'm hoping that they both go before our pick and that Oubre drops to us. 

[Tr1boy]

I think RHJ ceiling is Leonard

Leonard has come a long way on the offensive end. 

[Rondo9]

Just read over the thread and I got some comments

1. Harrell is a good player but what is his upside? We need players who could some day end up being elite. Drafting a 21 year old 6'6 pf doesn't really have huge upside. If he's available with the Clippers pick we should take him but our pick is too early.

2. I think Kaminsky is a solid player but if he is the best player available we need to trade up. If we pick at 16 I would prefer Portis to Kaminsky but I think we need to go big either way and a good floor spacing big would help.

3. Someone compared Myles Turner to Thabeet. Turner has the chance to be a great shot blocker but he also is extremely skilled. If Thabeet had Turner's offensive game he wouldn't have been a bust.

4. I agree that WCS could drop since I doubt the Jazz, Philly, and Detroit pick a center and there should be 3 or 4 centers drafted ahead of WCS so maybe he slips. However, we will still need to trade up to at latest the 8-10 pick in order to draft him.

5. LaVert or RHJ would both be great picks with the Clippers pick.

I'm going to say the C's trade up to grab WCS, and then get LaVert or RHJ with the Clippers pick (or we trade the clippers pick and trade two of our seconds to move up and grab one of those guys).

-Turner to Thabeet comparison is good.  Just not that mobile, agile on the court.  Turner can move a little better but he has a strange running technique that imo will result in injuries sooner or later. Again he does not fit with CBS system overall, only for specific situations (Against Hibbert). But as of late we are making the opposing teams follow our lead (go small)

-  Harrell is not 6'6.  He matched up against Brice Johnson last week and he was only a tad shorter. Brice Johnson is 6'9. Harrell is 6'8

- Everyone want the Celts to move up in the draft. How easy is that? When was the last time anyone can remember a team able to move up to top 5 having a 14th pick for example? bc of the way the salary cap/structure is these days, picks are very valuable to keep/develop

Turner is a big who can block shots and step out and hit the 3. That sounds like a perfect fit for Steven's system. Turner probably won't be ready to play away but he has a ton more potential than Harrell and we need to swing for the fences in the draft because we don't need depth.

Draft Express has Harrell as 6'6.5 in shoes. (6'5 w/o shoes) He's certainly not 6'8.

I agree that we won't move into the top 5 but there have been a bunch of trades where a team moves up into the 8-12 range (Chicago moved up last year)

If Harrell is only 6'7 then thats ok still. He has a long wingspan, 8'11 reach and is explosive off the ground.   
Blake Griffin is only 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. Faried only 6'7 with 6'11 wingspan.   

Harrell is a more explosive , intense version of Brandon Bass.  Brandon Bass has fit really well under CBS system.

We would not be grabbing Harrell to be a center but he could guard centers occasionally (like Crowder , due to his strength, won't give up position easily), depending what CBS wants to do out on the floor.   

IF Bass is not brought back, Harrell could fill in that mobile, athletic , ability to guard multiple position pf role and provide even more intensity.

I think Faried is a good comp for Harrell. But Harrell's lack of shooting would give you the same spacing problem Faried does for the Nuggets. As to the blake Griffin comparison, Blake is 6'8.5 with out shoes, Harrell is 6'5.5 without shoes. Harrell hasn't given the indication that he will ever be able to shoot like Bass.

Regardless, I don't think you draft a junior who is already what he will be long term vs a player with a higher ceiling (unless the Junior fits a need). We need the player with the higher ceiling. I don't agree that Harrell fits Steven's system either.

I'm not sure what your basing on what kind of player fits CBS system. But from what i have seen, he tends to like playing players who are tough, works extremely hard, versatile defender/guard multiple positions, able to run end to end  on multiple occasions between whistles, good bbiq.   Able to make the open jump shots is nice also

Harrell outside of ability to make jump shot on a consistent basis (he has improved though, and more willing to shoot it then in the past) meets all the other criteria I listed above.   He is also explosive and is a capable rim protector.   

So tell me, why wouldn't he fit under CBS system?  or does he not fit in with what your looking for?

To me Stevens system likes position versatility, floor spacing and ball handlers.

Harrell is an undersized 4 in the NBA. I don't think you can have him guard anything but 4's in the NBA. So I don't see any positional versatility. He isn't a very good shooter so you won't see him space the floor much and he doesn't have any perimeter ball handling skills.

Stevens likes to go small, when he goes small he usually has lineup that consist of 5 shooters or 4 shooters and one big. Harrell can't be in the 5 shooter lineups because he can't shoot, and if you are playing him as your only big, he won't be able to protect the rim like you would want in that lineup.

A good comp for why he wouldn't succeed is Thomas Robinson. 4's that can't either shoot or block shots aren't succeeding as anything more than back ups in todays NBA.

I like him Harrell just not with our first pick because he doesn't have the upside because of his lack of size and age.

I disagree with many of your points. I have watched several Louisville last and this season games and Harrell can defend more than one position. He is all over the court some games.  See the link below from 6:39. He can guard sfs and keep up even with some guards out on the perimeter. He has good lateral quickness.  He is a strong kid and also will make it tough for some centers to gain inside position. Willing to battle on the inside.

The problem with that statement is that he's doing it on the college level. Covering big college stiffs is a far cry from how that'll translate to the next level.

You seem to be all over the place with your player likes, so I can't quite figure you out. However, the one common denominator is that you seem very keen on college basketball stats/production and thinking that means it'll translate on the next level. For me, I'd much rather take the young 18-19 year old freshman with upside, rather than the 21-22 year old (like your guys Kaminsky, Harrell, etc.) with a limited ceiling.

You'd rather have Kaminsky ahead of Turner and Harrell ahead of say, Cliff Alexander, but imagine for a second what those younger players would be doing on the college level at the same age as Kaminsky and Harrell.

but those players haven't. And we don't know if they will.

I value the proof of hard work and accomplishments more than "potential". How many guys with off the charts potential ever reach it??  Russell Westbrook is the last guy I can think of that didn't accomplish much in college to become a star in the NBA.

Would you draft Perry Jones over Jae Crowder?  Jeremy Lamb over Marcus Smart?

something to think about

Those are strange comparisons.  How about these?  Would you draft Embiid over Smart?  The Greek Freak over Olynyk?  The correct answer is everyday and twice on Sunday.

For teams that have mediocre talent at best, the draft should be all about taking the best player available.  NBA readiness, system fit, etc should be tertiary considerations.  The potential for getting a star is worth the risk of a draft pick bust.  Freshman and sophomores drafted for their potential are relatively speaking much more likely to succeed in the NBA than more accomplished juniors and seniors.

That's the sort of thinking that led to freshman Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being selected over junior Damien Lillard.  Or freshman Tyreke Evans and sophomore Jonny Flynn over junior Stephan Curry.

Mike

No, not exactly. Don't you find it ironic that both the players you mentioned (Lillard and Curry) played in smaller schools against weaker competition?

Who did the Greek Freak play against?

And if you need more evidence...

2011 NBA Draft.

#4 Tristan Thompson, freshman from Texas.
#11 Klay Thompson, junior from Washington State.
#16 Nikola Vucevic, junior from USC.

And don't forget...

#30 Jimmy Butler, senior from Marquette.

It's true that great players tend to leave school earlier now.  But plenty of guys who turn out to be busts or average NBA players also leave school earlier as well.

Mike

As I stated before, Ainge should have taken the Greek Freak over KO.  He took the safe accomplished but modest potential player over the raw high potential player who played in a lesser Euro league.  It is exactly the kind of move that I don't want Ainge to make in this draft.
 

What has the greek freak accomplished so far? Danny saw him live before skipping on him on draft night . so did 12-13 other gms.   I like parts of the greek freaks game but he has some major holes. As does KO.  To say he was clearly better pick, nobody knows that yet. 

And like i have stated earlier a freshman considered in the top 5-7 level talent is not the same as a freshman in the 12-17 or 20-30 pick levels.  If the celts are picking 12-15, i rather pick an accomplished sophomore/junior vs a freshman that didnt accomplish much but is considered highly regarded bc he has a 7'5 wingspan. Like Myles Turner

There is a very short list of freshmen picked in the 12-30 areas that have managed to have  successful careers in the nba.

The Greek Freak has accomplished a lot.  He was a very raw talent projected as a late lottery/mid first pick.  He jumped directly from a lesser Euro league to the NBA and in 2 seasons has established himself as a solid NBA starter.  He shows future All-Star potential and won't turn 21 until December.  KO turns 24 next month.  He hasn't established himself as a starter and may just end up as a solid bench player.    If a straight up trade of KO for the Greek Freak presented itself, are you saying you wouldn't make it? 

I'm not sold on Turner's potential yet but Kaminsky's accomplishments (good senior year, decent junior) don't impress me much.  Very few major college seniors accomplish much in the NBA.  Personally I'm hoping that they both go before our pick and that Oubre drops to us.

Or KO could end up as a solid starter.

[Tr1boy]

Just read over the thread and I got some comments

1. Harrell is a good player but what is his upside? We need players who could some day end up being elite. Drafting a 21 year old 6'6 pf doesn't really have huge upside. If he's available with the Clippers pick we should take him but our pick is too early.

2. I think Kaminsky is a solid player but if he is the best player available we need to trade up. If we pick at 16 I would prefer Portis to Kaminsky but I think we need to go big either way and a good floor spacing big would help.

3. Someone compared Myles Turner to Thabeet. Turner has the chance to be a great shot blocker but he also is extremely skilled. If Thabeet had Turner's offensive game he wouldn't have been a bust.

4. I agree that WCS could drop since I doubt the Jazz, Philly, and Detroit pick a center and there should be 3 or 4 centers drafted ahead of WCS so maybe he slips. However, we will still need to trade up to at latest the 8-10 pick in order to draft him.

5. LaVert or RHJ would both be great picks with the Clippers pick.

I'm going to say the C's trade up to grab WCS, and then get LaVert or RHJ with the Clippers pick (or we trade the clippers pick and trade two of our seconds to move up and grab one of those guys).

-Turner to Thabeet comparison is good.  Just not that mobile, agile on the court.  Turner can move a little better but he has a strange running technique that imo will result in injuries sooner or later. Again he does not fit with CBS system overall, only for specific situations (Against Hibbert). But as of late we are making the opposing teams follow our lead (go small)

-  Harrell is not 6'6.  He matched up against Brice Johnson last week and he was only a tad shorter. Brice Johnson is 6'9. Harrell is 6'8

- Everyone want the Celts to move up in the draft. How easy is that? When was the last time anyone can remember a team able to move up to top 5 having a 14th pick for example? bc of the way the salary cap/structure is these days, picks are very valuable to keep/develop

Turner is a big who can block shots and step out and hit the 3. That sounds like a perfect fit for Steven's system. Turner probably won't be ready to play away but he has a ton more potential than Harrell and we need to swing for the fences in the draft because we don't need depth.

Draft Express has Harrell as 6'6.5 in shoes. (6'5 w/o shoes) He's certainly not 6'8.

I agree that we won't move into the top 5 but there have been a bunch of trades where a team moves up into the 8-12 range (Chicago moved up last year)

If Harrell is only 6'7 then thats ok still. He has a long wingspan, 8'11 reach and is explosive off the ground.   
Blake Griffin is only 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. Faried only 6'7 with 6'11 wingspan.   

Harrell is a more explosive , intense version of Brandon Bass.  Brandon Bass has fit really well under CBS system.

We would not be grabbing Harrell to be a center but he could guard centers occasionally (like Crowder , due to his strength, won't give up position easily), depending what CBS wants to do out on the floor.   

IF Bass is not brought back, Harrell could fill in that mobile, athletic , ability to guard multiple position pf role and provide even more intensity.

I think Faried is a good comp for Harrell. But Harrell's lack of shooting would give you the same spacing problem Faried does for the Nuggets. As to the blake Griffin comparison, Blake is 6'8.5 with out shoes, Harrell is 6'5.5 without shoes. Harrell hasn't given the indication that he will ever be able to shoot like Bass.

Regardless, I don't think you draft a junior who is already what he will be long term vs a player with a higher ceiling (unless the Junior fits a need). We need the player with the higher ceiling. I don't agree that Harrell fits Steven's system either.

I'm not sure what your basing on what kind of player fits CBS system. But from what i have seen, he tends to like playing players who are tough, works extremely hard, versatile defender/guard multiple positions, able to run end to end  on multiple occasions between whistles, good bbiq.   Able to make the open jump shots is nice also

Harrell outside of ability to make jump shot on a consistent basis (he has improved though, and more willing to shoot it then in the past) meets all the other criteria I listed above.   He is also explosive and is a capable rim protector.   

So tell me, why wouldn't he fit under CBS system?  or does he not fit in with what your looking for?

To me Stevens system likes position versatility, floor spacing and ball handlers.

Harrell is an undersized 4 in the NBA. I don't think you can have him guard anything but 4's in the NBA. So I don't see any positional versatility. He isn't a very good shooter so you won't see him space the floor much and he doesn't have any perimeter ball handling skills.

Stevens likes to go small, when he goes small he usually has lineup that consist of 5 shooters or 4 shooters and one big. Harrell can't be in the 5 shooter lineups because he can't shoot, and if you are playing him as your only big, he won't be able to protect the rim like you would want in that lineup.

A good comp for why he wouldn't succeed is Thomas Robinson. 4's that can't either shoot or block shots aren't succeeding as anything more than back ups in todays NBA.

I like him Harrell just not with our first pick because he doesn't have the upside because of his lack of size and age.

I disagree with many of your points. I have watched several Louisville last and this season games and Harrell can defend more than one position. He is all over the court some games.  See the link below from 6:39. He can guard sfs and keep up even with some guards out on the perimeter. He has good lateral quickness.  He is a strong kid and also will make it tough for some centers to gain inside position. Willing to battle on the inside.

The problem with that statement is that he's doing it on the college level. Covering big college stiffs is a far cry from how that'll translate to the next level.

You seem to be all over the place with your player likes, so I can't quite figure you out. However, the one common denominator is that you seem very keen on college basketball stats/production and thinking that means it'll translate on the next level. For me, I'd much rather take the young 18-19 year old freshman with upside, rather than the 21-22 year old (like your guys Kaminsky, Harrell, etc.) with a limited ceiling.

You'd rather have Kaminsky ahead of Turner and Harrell ahead of say, Cliff Alexander, but imagine for a second what those younger players would be doing on the college level at the same age as Kaminsky and Harrell.

but those players haven't. And we don't know if they will.

I value the proof of hard work and accomplishments more than "potential". How many guys with off the charts potential ever reach it??  Russell Westbrook is the last guy I can think of that didn't accomplish much in college to become a star in the NBA.

Would you draft Perry Jones over Jae Crowder?  Jeremy Lamb over Marcus Smart?

something to think about

Those are strange comparisons.  How about these?  Would you draft Embiid over Smart?  The Greek Freak over Olynyk?  The correct answer is everyday and twice on Sunday.

For teams that have mediocre talent at best, the draft should be all about taking the best player available.  NBA readiness, system fit, etc should be tertiary considerations.  The potential for getting a star is worth the risk of a draft pick bust.  Freshman and sophomores drafted for their potential are relatively speaking much more likely to succeed in the NBA than more accomplished juniors and seniors.

That's the sort of thinking that led to freshman Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being selected over junior Damien Lillard.  Or freshman Tyreke Evans and sophomore Jonny Flynn over junior Stephan Curry.

Mike

No, not exactly. Don't you find it ironic that both the players you mentioned (Lillard and Curry) played in smaller schools against weaker competition?

Who did the Greek Freak play against?

And if you need more evidence...

2011 NBA Draft.

#4 Tristan Thompson, freshman from Texas.
#11 Klay Thompson, junior from Washington State.
#16 Nikola Vucevic, junior from USC.

And don't forget...

#30 Jimmy Butler, senior from Marquette.

It's true that great players tend to leave school earlier now.  But plenty of guys who turn out to be busts or average NBA players also leave school earlier as well.

Mike

As I stated before, Ainge should have taken the Greek Freak over KO.  He took the safe accomplished but modest potential player over the raw high potential player who played in a lesser Euro league.  It is exactly the kind of move that I don't want Ainge to make in this draft.
 

What has the greek freak accomplished so far? Danny saw him live before skipping on him on draft night . so did 12-13 other gms.   I like parts of the greek freaks game but he has some major holes. As does KO.  To say he was clearly better pick, nobody knows that yet. 

And like i have stated earlier a freshman considered in the top 5-7 level talent is not the same as a freshman in the 12-17 or 20-30 pick levels.  If the celts are picking 12-15, i rather pick an accomplished sophomore/junior vs a freshman that didnt accomplish much but is considered highly regarded bc he has a 7'5 wingspan. Like Myles Turner

There is a very short list of freshmen picked in the 12-30 areas that have managed to have  successful careers in the nba.

The Greek Freak has accomplished a lot.  He was a very raw talent projected as a late lottery/mid first pick.  He jumped directly from a lesser Euro league to the NBA and in 2 seasons has established himself as a solid NBA starter.  He shows future All-Star potential and won't turn 21 until December.  KO turns 24 next month.  He hasn't established himself as a starter and may just end up as a solid bench player.    If a straight up trade of KO for the Greek Freak presented itself, are you saying you wouldn't make it? 

I'm not sold on Turner's potential yet but Kaminsky's accomplishments (good senior year, decent junior) don't impress me much.  Very few major college seniors accomplish much in the NBA.  Personally I'm hoping that they both go before our pick and that Oubre drops to us.

Or KO could end up as a solid starter.

Giannis is a better jump shot away from being a real good player in this league. He has to change his form completely imo.  His shooting form is so bad he can't dribble, stop and pop. 

KO just has to keep working on his body.  He becomes leaner, stronger and he will be a better player than he is today.

We will see what happens

[tazzmaniac]

Just read over the thread and I got some comments

1. Harrell is a good player but what is his upside? We need players who could some day end up being elite. Drafting a 21 year old 6'6 pf doesn't really have huge upside. If he's available with the Clippers pick we should take him but our pick is too early.

2. I think Kaminsky is a solid player but if he is the best player available we need to trade up. If we pick at 16 I would prefer Portis to Kaminsky but I think we need to go big either way and a good floor spacing big would help.

3. Someone compared Myles Turner to Thabeet. Turner has the chance to be a great shot blocker but he also is extremely skilled. If Thabeet had Turner's offensive game he wouldn't have been a bust.

4. I agree that WCS could drop since I doubt the Jazz, Philly, and Detroit pick a center and there should be 3 or 4 centers drafted ahead of WCS so maybe he slips. However, we will still need to trade up to at latest the 8-10 pick in order to draft him.

5. LaVert or RHJ would both be great picks with the Clippers pick.

I'm going to say the C's trade up to grab WCS, and then get LaVert or RHJ with the Clippers pick (or we trade the clippers pick and trade two of our seconds to move up and grab one of those guys).

-Turner to Thabeet comparison is good.  Just not that mobile, agile on the court.  Turner can move a little better but he has a strange running technique that imo will result in injuries sooner or later. Again he does not fit with CBS system overall, only for specific situations (Against Hibbert). But as of late we are making the opposing teams follow our lead (go small)

-  Harrell is not 6'6.  He matched up against Brice Johnson last week and he was only a tad shorter. Brice Johnson is 6'9. Harrell is 6'8

- Everyone want the Celts to move up in the draft. How easy is that? When was the last time anyone can remember a team able to move up to top 5 having a 14th pick for example? bc of the way the salary cap/structure is these days, picks are very valuable to keep/develop

Turner is a big who can block shots and step out and hit the 3. That sounds like a perfect fit for Steven's system. Turner probably won't be ready to play away but he has a ton more potential than Harrell and we need to swing for the fences in the draft because we don't need depth.

Draft Express has Harrell as 6'6.5 in shoes. (6'5 w/o shoes) He's certainly not 6'8.

I agree that we won't move into the top 5 but there have been a bunch of trades where a team moves up into the 8-12 range (Chicago moved up last year)

If Harrell is only 6'7 then thats ok still. He has a long wingspan, 8'11 reach and is explosive off the ground.   
Blake Griffin is only 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. Faried only 6'7 with 6'11 wingspan.   

Harrell is a more explosive , intense version of Brandon Bass.  Brandon Bass has fit really well under CBS system.

We would not be grabbing Harrell to be a center but he could guard centers occasionally (like Crowder , due to his strength, won't give up position easily), depending what CBS wants to do out on the floor.   

IF Bass is not brought back, Harrell could fill in that mobile, athletic , ability to guard multiple position pf role and provide even more intensity.

I think Faried is a good comp for Harrell. But Harrell's lack of shooting would give you the same spacing problem Faried does for the Nuggets. As to the blake Griffin comparison, Blake is 6'8.5 with out shoes, Harrell is 6'5.5 without shoes. Harrell hasn't given the indication that he will ever be able to shoot like Bass.

Regardless, I don't think you draft a junior who is already what he will be long term vs a player with a higher ceiling (unless the Junior fits a need). We need the player with the higher ceiling. I don't agree that Harrell fits Steven's system either.

I'm not sure what your basing on what kind of player fits CBS system. But from what i have seen, he tends to like playing players who are tough, works extremely hard, versatile defender/guard multiple positions, able to run end to end  on multiple occasions between whistles, good bbiq.   Able to make the open jump shots is nice also

Harrell outside of ability to make jump shot on a consistent basis (he has improved though, and more willing to shoot it then in the past) meets all the other criteria I listed above.   He is also explosive and is a capable rim protector.   

So tell me, why wouldn't he fit under CBS system?  or does he not fit in with what your looking for?

To me Stevens system likes position versatility, floor spacing and ball handlers.

Harrell is an undersized 4 in the NBA. I don't think you can have him guard anything but 4's in the NBA. So I don't see any positional versatility. He isn't a very good shooter so you won't see him space the floor much and he doesn't have any perimeter ball handling skills.

Stevens likes to go small, when he goes small he usually has lineup that consist of 5 shooters or 4 shooters and one big. Harrell can't be in the 5 shooter lineups because he can't shoot, and if you are playing him as your only big, he won't be able to protect the rim like you would want in that lineup.

A good comp for why he wouldn't succeed is Thomas Robinson. 4's that can't either shoot or block shots aren't succeeding as anything more than back ups in todays NBA.

I like him Harrell just not with our first pick because he doesn't have the upside because of his lack of size and age.

I disagree with many of your points. I have watched several Louisville last and this season games and Harrell can defend more than one position. He is all over the court some games.  See the link below from 6:39. He can guard sfs and keep up even with some guards out on the perimeter. He has good lateral quickness.  He is a strong kid and also will make it tough for some centers to gain inside position. Willing to battle on the inside.

The problem with that statement is that he's doing it on the college level. Covering big college stiffs is a far cry from how that'll translate to the next level.

You seem to be all over the place with your player likes, so I can't quite figure you out. However, the one common denominator is that you seem very keen on college basketball stats/production and thinking that means it'll translate on the next level. For me, I'd much rather take the young 18-19 year old freshman with upside, rather than the 21-22 year old (like your guys Kaminsky, Harrell, etc.) with a limited ceiling.

You'd rather have Kaminsky ahead of Turner and Harrell ahead of say, Cliff Alexander, but imagine for a second what those younger players would be doing on the college level at the same age as Kaminsky and Harrell.

but those players haven't. And we don't know if they will.

I value the proof of hard work and accomplishments more than "potential". How many guys with off the charts potential ever reach it??  Russell Westbrook is the last guy I can think of that didn't accomplish much in college to become a star in the NBA.

Would you draft Perry Jones over Jae Crowder?  Jeremy Lamb over Marcus Smart?

something to think about

Those are strange comparisons.  How about these?  Would you draft Embiid over Smart?  The Greek Freak over Olynyk?  The correct answer is everyday and twice on Sunday.

For teams that have mediocre talent at best, the draft should be all about taking the best player available.  NBA readiness, system fit, etc should be tertiary considerations.  The potential for getting a star is worth the risk of a draft pick bust.  Freshman and sophomores drafted for their potential are relatively speaking much more likely to succeed in the NBA than more accomplished juniors and seniors.

That's the sort of thinking that led to freshman Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being selected over junior Damien Lillard.  Or freshman Tyreke Evans and sophomore Jonny Flynn over junior Stephan Curry.

Mike

No, not exactly. Don't you find it ironic that both the players you mentioned (Lillard and Curry) played in smaller schools against weaker competition?

Who did the Greek Freak play against?

And if you need more evidence...

2011 NBA Draft.

#4 Tristan Thompson, freshman from Texas.
#11 Klay Thompson, junior from Washington State.
#16 Nikola Vucevic, junior from USC.

And don't forget...

#30 Jimmy Butler, senior from Marquette.

It's true that great players tend to leave school earlier now.  But plenty of guys who turn out to be busts or average NBA players also leave school earlier as well.

Mike

As I stated before, Ainge should have taken the Greek Freak over KO.  He took the safe accomplished but modest potential player over the raw high potential player who played in a lesser Euro league.  It is exactly the kind of move that I don't want Ainge to make in this draft.
 

What has the greek freak accomplished so far? Danny saw him live before skipping on him on draft night . so did 12-13 other gms.   I like parts of the greek freaks game but he has some major holes. As does KO.  To say he was clearly better pick, nobody knows that yet. 

And like i have stated earlier a freshman considered in the top 5-7 level talent is not the same as a freshman in the 12-17 or 20-30 pick levels.  If the celts are picking 12-15, i rather pick an accomplished sophomore/junior vs a freshman that didnt accomplish much but is considered highly regarded bc he has a 7'5 wingspan. Like Myles Turner

There is a very short list of freshmen picked in the 12-30 areas that have managed to have  successful careers in the nba.

The Greek Freak has accomplished a lot.  He was a very raw talent projected as a late lottery/mid first pick.  He jumped directly from a lesser Euro league to the NBA and in 2 seasons has established himself as a solid NBA starter.  He shows future All-Star potential and won't turn 21 until December.  KO turns 24 next month.  He hasn't established himself as a starter and may just end up as a solid bench player.    If a straight up trade of KO for the Greek Freak presented itself, are you saying you wouldn't make it? 

I'm not sold on Turner's potential yet but Kaminsky's accomplishments (good senior year, decent junior) don't impress me much.  Very few major college seniors accomplish much in the NBA.  Personally I'm hoping that they both go before our pick and that Oubre drops to us.

Or KO could end up as a solid starter.

Giannis is a better jump shot away from being a real good player in this league. He has to change his form completely imo.  His shooting form is so bad he can't dribble, stop and pop. 

KO just has to keep working on his body.  He becomes leaner, stronger and he will be a better player than he is today.

We will see what happens

Giannis is only 20 so he has plenty of time to improve.  His jumper doesn't seem that bad to me but hopefully they're working on it in practice.  During the games, Kidd seems to want him driving the lane all the time.   We have two games against the Bucks in April to evaluate him.  It'll be good to see Middleton play as well. 

[Tr1boy]

Just read over the thread and I got some comments

1. Harrell is a good player but what is his upside? We need players who could some day end up being elite. Drafting a 21 year old 6'6 pf doesn't really have huge upside. If he's available with the Clippers pick we should take him but our pick is too early.

2. I think Kaminsky is a solid player but if he is the best player available we need to trade up. If we pick at 16 I would prefer Portis to Kaminsky but I think we need to go big either way and a good floor spacing big would help.

3. Someone compared Myles Turner to Thabeet. Turner has the chance to be a great shot blocker but he also is extremely skilled. If Thabeet had Turner's offensive game he wouldn't have been a bust.

4. I agree that WCS could drop since I doubt the Jazz, Philly, and Detroit pick a center and there should be 3 or 4 centers drafted ahead of WCS so maybe he slips. However, we will still need to trade up to at latest the 8-10 pick in order to draft him.

5. LaVert or RHJ would both be great picks with the Clippers pick.

I'm going to say the C's trade up to grab WCS, and then get LaVert or RHJ with the Clippers pick (or we trade the clippers pick and trade two of our seconds to move up and grab one of those guys).

-Turner to Thabeet comparison is good.  Just not that mobile, agile on the court.  Turner can move a little better but he has a strange running technique that imo will result in injuries sooner or later. Again he does not fit with CBS system overall, only for specific situations (Against Hibbert). But as of late we are making the opposing teams follow our lead (go small)

-  Harrell is not 6'6.  He matched up against Brice Johnson last week and he was only a tad shorter. Brice Johnson is 6'9. Harrell is 6'8

- Everyone want the Celts to move up in the draft. How easy is that? When was the last time anyone can remember a team able to move up to top 5 having a 14th pick for example? bc of the way the salary cap/structure is these days, picks are very valuable to keep/develop

Turner is a big who can block shots and step out and hit the 3. That sounds like a perfect fit for Steven's system. Turner probably won't be ready to play away but he has a ton more potential than Harrell and we need to swing for the fences in the draft because we don't need depth.

Draft Express has Harrell as 6'6.5 in shoes. (6'5 w/o shoes) He's certainly not 6'8.

I agree that we won't move into the top 5 but there have been a bunch of trades where a team moves up into the 8-12 range (Chicago moved up last year)

If Harrell is only 6'7 then thats ok still. He has a long wingspan, 8'11 reach and is explosive off the ground.   
Blake Griffin is only 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. Faried only 6'7 with 6'11 wingspan.   

Harrell is a more explosive , intense version of Brandon Bass.  Brandon Bass has fit really well under CBS system.

We would not be grabbing Harrell to be a center but he could guard centers occasionally (like Crowder , due to his strength, won't give up position easily), depending what CBS wants to do out on the floor.   

IF Bass is not brought back, Harrell could fill in that mobile, athletic , ability to guard multiple position pf role and provide even more intensity.

I think Faried is a good comp for Harrell. But Harrell's lack of shooting would give you the same spacing problem Faried does for the Nuggets. As to the blake Griffin comparison, Blake is 6'8.5 with out shoes, Harrell is 6'5.5 without shoes. Harrell hasn't given the indication that he will ever be able to shoot like Bass.

Regardless, I don't think you draft a junior who is already what he will be long term vs a player with a higher ceiling (unless the Junior fits a need). We need the player with the higher ceiling. I don't agree that Harrell fits Steven's system either.

I'm not sure what your basing on what kind of player fits CBS system. But from what i have seen, he tends to like playing players who are tough, works extremely hard, versatile defender/guard multiple positions, able to run end to end  on multiple occasions between whistles, good bbiq.   Able to make the open jump shots is nice also

Harrell outside of ability to make jump shot on a consistent basis (he has improved though, and more willing to shoot it then in the past) meets all the other criteria I listed above.   He is also explosive and is a capable rim protector.   

So tell me, why wouldn't he fit under CBS system?  or does he not fit in with what your looking for?

To me Stevens system likes position versatility, floor spacing and ball handlers.

Harrell is an undersized 4 in the NBA. I don't think you can have him guard anything but 4's in the NBA. So I don't see any positional versatility. He isn't a very good shooter so you won't see him space the floor much and he doesn't have any perimeter ball handling skills.

Stevens likes to go small, when he goes small he usually has lineup that consist of 5 shooters or 4 shooters and one big. Harrell can't be in the 5 shooter lineups because he can't shoot, and if you are playing him as your only big, he won't be able to protect the rim like you would want in that lineup.

A good comp for why he wouldn't succeed is Thomas Robinson. 4's that can't either shoot or block shots aren't succeeding as anything more than back ups in todays NBA.

I like him Harrell just not with our first pick because he doesn't have the upside because of his lack of size and age.

I disagree with many of your points. I have watched several Louisville last and this season games and Harrell can defend more than one position. He is all over the court some games.  See the link below from 6:39. He can guard sfs and keep up even with some guards out on the perimeter. He has good lateral quickness.  He is a strong kid and also will make it tough for some centers to gain inside position. Willing to battle on the inside.

The problem with that statement is that he's doing it on the college level. Covering big college stiffs is a far cry from how that'll translate to the next level.

You seem to be all over the place with your player likes, so I can't quite figure you out. However, the one common denominator is that you seem very keen on college basketball stats/production and thinking that means it'll translate on the next level. For me, I'd much rather take the young 18-19 year old freshman with upside, rather than the 21-22 year old (like your guys Kaminsky, Harrell, etc.) with a limited ceiling.

You'd rather have Kaminsky ahead of Turner and Harrell ahead of say, Cliff Alexander, but imagine for a second what those younger players would be doing on the college level at the same age as Kaminsky and Harrell.

but those players haven't. And we don't know if they will.

I value the proof of hard work and accomplishments more than "potential". How many guys with off the charts potential ever reach it??  Russell Westbrook is the last guy I can think of that didn't accomplish much in college to become a star in the NBA.

Would you draft Perry Jones over Jae Crowder?  Jeremy Lamb over Marcus Smart?

something to think about

Those are strange comparisons.  How about these?  Would you draft Embiid over Smart?  The Greek Freak over Olynyk?  The correct answer is everyday and twice on Sunday.

For teams that have mediocre talent at best, the draft should be all about taking the best player available.  NBA readiness, system fit, etc should be tertiary considerations.  The potential for getting a star is worth the risk of a draft pick bust.  Freshman and sophomores drafted for their potential are relatively speaking much more likely to succeed in the NBA than more accomplished juniors and seniors.

That's the sort of thinking that led to freshman Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being selected over junior Damien Lillard.  Or freshman Tyreke Evans and sophomore Jonny Flynn over junior Stephan Curry.

Mike

No, not exactly. Don't you find it ironic that both the players you mentioned (Lillard and Curry) played in smaller schools against weaker competition?

Who did the Greek Freak play against?

And if you need more evidence...

2011 NBA Draft.

#4 Tristan Thompson, freshman from Texas.
#11 Klay Thompson, junior from Washington State.
#16 Nikola Vucevic, junior from USC.

And don't forget...

#30 Jimmy Butler, senior from Marquette.

It's true that great players tend to leave school earlier now.  But plenty of guys who turn out to be busts or average NBA players also leave school earlier as well.

Mike

As I stated before, Ainge should have taken the Greek Freak over KO.  He took the safe accomplished but modest potential player over the raw high potential player who played in a lesser Euro league.  It is exactly the kind of move that I don't want Ainge to make in this draft.
 

What has the greek freak accomplished so far? Danny saw him live before skipping on him on draft night . so did 12-13 other gms.   I like parts of the greek freaks game but he has some major holes. As does KO.  To say he was clearly better pick, nobody knows that yet. 

And like i have stated earlier a freshman considered in the top 5-7 level talent is not the same as a freshman in the 12-17 or 20-30 pick levels.  If the celts are picking 12-15, i rather pick an accomplished sophomore/junior vs a freshman that didnt accomplish much but is considered highly regarded bc he has a 7'5 wingspan. Like Myles Turner

There is a very short list of freshmen picked in the 12-30 areas that have managed to have  successful careers in the nba.

The Greek Freak has accomplished a lot.  He was a very raw talent projected as a late lottery/mid first pick.  He jumped directly from a lesser Euro league to the NBA and in 2 seasons has established himself as a solid NBA starter.  He shows future All-Star potential and won't turn 21 until December.  KO turns 24 next month.  He hasn't established himself as a starter and may just end up as a solid bench player.    If a straight up trade of KO for the Greek Freak presented itself, are you saying you wouldn't make it? 

I'm not sold on Turner's potential yet but Kaminsky's accomplishments (good senior year, decent junior) don't impress me much.  Very few major college seniors accomplish much in the NBA.  Personally I'm hoping that they both go before our pick and that Oubre drops to us.

Or KO could end up as a solid starter.

Giannis is a better jump shot away from being a real good player in this league. He has to change his form completely imo.  His shooting form is so bad he can't dribble, stop and pop. 

KO just has to keep working on his body.  He becomes leaner, stronger and he will be a better player than he is today.

We will see what happens

Giannis is only 20 so he has plenty of time to improve.  His jumper doesn't seem that bad to me but hopefully they're working on it in practice.  During the games, Kidd seems to want him driving the lane all the time.   We have two games against the Bucks in April to evaluate him.  It'll be good to see Middleton play as well.

It's not that Kidd wants him to drive in all the time. It's bc his shot is his biggest weakpoint.  He lacks a midrange game also

Danny saw him live. And he passed up on him.  I trust Danny's decision

I'm really surprised by the performance of Middleton. He has some Paul Pierce in his game. Not too quick/athletic but knows his spots. Headfakes, step backs. Seems like a savvy smart player.

Something has to give with that Bucks middle part of the roster.  Parker, Middleton and Giannis. Middleton could be had and I wouldn't mind bringing him in. Though we really could use more top flight athletes in our lineup right now

[tazzmaniac]

Just read over the thread and I got some comments

1. Harrell is a good player but what is his upside? We need players who could some day end up being elite. Drafting a 21 year old 6'6 pf doesn't really have huge upside. If he's available with the Clippers pick we should take him but our pick is too early.

2. I think Kaminsky is a solid player but if he is the best player available we need to trade up. If we pick at 16 I would prefer Portis to Kaminsky but I think we need to go big either way and a good floor spacing big would help.

3. Someone compared Myles Turner to Thabeet. Turner has the chance to be a great shot blocker but he also is extremely skilled. If Thabeet had Turner's offensive game he wouldn't have been a bust.

4. I agree that WCS could drop since I doubt the Jazz, Philly, and Detroit pick a center and there should be 3 or 4 centers drafted ahead of WCS so maybe he slips. However, we will still need to trade up to at latest the 8-10 pick in order to draft him.

5. LaVert or RHJ would both be great picks with the Clippers pick.

I'm going to say the C's trade up to grab WCS, and then get LaVert or RHJ with the Clippers pick (or we trade the clippers pick and trade two of our seconds to move up and grab one of those guys).

-Turner to Thabeet comparison is good.  Just not that mobile, agile on the court.  Turner can move a little better but he has a strange running technique that imo will result in injuries sooner or later. Again he does not fit with CBS system overall, only for specific situations (Against Hibbert). But as of late we are making the opposing teams follow our lead (go small)

-  Harrell is not 6'6.  He matched up against Brice Johnson last week and he was only a tad shorter. Brice Johnson is 6'9. Harrell is 6'8

- Everyone want the Celts to move up in the draft. How easy is that? When was the last time anyone can remember a team able to move up to top 5 having a 14th pick for example? bc of the way the salary cap/structure is these days, picks are very valuable to keep/develop

Turner is a big who can block shots and step out and hit the 3. That sounds like a perfect fit for Steven's system. Turner probably won't be ready to play away but he has a ton more potential than Harrell and we need to swing for the fences in the draft because we don't need depth.

Draft Express has Harrell as 6'6.5 in shoes. (6'5 w/o shoes) He's certainly not 6'8.

I agree that we won't move into the top 5 but there have been a bunch of trades where a team moves up into the 8-12 range (Chicago moved up last year)

If Harrell is only 6'7 then thats ok still. He has a long wingspan, 8'11 reach and is explosive off the ground.   
Blake Griffin is only 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. Faried only 6'7 with 6'11 wingspan.   

Harrell is a more explosive , intense version of Brandon Bass.  Brandon Bass has fit really well under CBS system.

We would not be grabbing Harrell to be a center but he could guard centers occasionally (like Crowder , due to his strength, won't give up position easily), depending what CBS wants to do out on the floor.   

IF Bass is not brought back, Harrell could fill in that mobile, athletic , ability to guard multiple position pf role and provide even more intensity.

I think Faried is a good comp for Harrell. But Harrell's lack of shooting would give you the same spacing problem Faried does for the Nuggets. As to the blake Griffin comparison, Blake is 6'8.5 with out shoes, Harrell is 6'5.5 without shoes. Harrell hasn't given the indication that he will ever be able to shoot like Bass.

Regardless, I don't think you draft a junior who is already what he will be long term vs a player with a higher ceiling (unless the Junior fits a need). We need the player with the higher ceiling. I don't agree that Harrell fits Steven's system either.

I'm not sure what your basing on what kind of player fits CBS system. But from what i have seen, he tends to like playing players who are tough, works extremely hard, versatile defender/guard multiple positions, able to run end to end  on multiple occasions between whistles, good bbiq.   Able to make the open jump shots is nice also

Harrell outside of ability to make jump shot on a consistent basis (he has improved though, and more willing to shoot it then in the past) meets all the other criteria I listed above.   He is also explosive and is a capable rim protector.   

So tell me, why wouldn't he fit under CBS system?  or does he not fit in with what your looking for?

To me Stevens system likes position versatility, floor spacing and ball handlers.

Harrell is an undersized 4 in the NBA. I don't think you can have him guard anything but 4's in the NBA. So I don't see any positional versatility. He isn't a very good shooter so you won't see him space the floor much and he doesn't have any perimeter ball handling skills.

Stevens likes to go small, when he goes small he usually has lineup that consist of 5 shooters or 4 shooters and one big. Harrell can't be in the 5 shooter lineups because he can't shoot, and if you are playing him as your only big, he won't be able to protect the rim like you would want in that lineup.

A good comp for why he wouldn't succeed is Thomas Robinson. 4's that can't either shoot or block shots aren't succeeding as anything more than back ups in todays NBA.

I like him Harrell just not with our first pick because he doesn't have the upside because of his lack of size and age.

I disagree with many of your points. I have watched several Louisville last and this season games and Harrell can defend more than one position. He is all over the court some games.  See the link below from 6:39. He can guard sfs and keep up even with some guards out on the perimeter. He has good lateral quickness.  He is a strong kid and also will make it tough for some centers to gain inside position. Willing to battle on the inside.

The problem with that statement is that he's doing it on the college level. Covering big college stiffs is a far cry from how that'll translate to the next level.

You seem to be all over the place with your player likes, so I can't quite figure you out. However, the one common denominator is that you seem very keen on college basketball stats/production and thinking that means it'll translate on the next level. For me, I'd much rather take the young 18-19 year old freshman with upside, rather than the 21-22 year old (like your guys Kaminsky, Harrell, etc.) with a limited ceiling.

You'd rather have Kaminsky ahead of Turner and Harrell ahead of say, Cliff Alexander, but imagine for a second what those younger players would be doing on the college level at the same age as Kaminsky and Harrell.

but those players haven't. And we don't know if they will.

I value the proof of hard work and accomplishments more than "potential". How many guys with off the charts potential ever reach it??  Russell Westbrook is the last guy I can think of that didn't accomplish much in college to become a star in the NBA.

Would you draft Perry Jones over Jae Crowder?  Jeremy Lamb over Marcus Smart?

something to think about

Those are strange comparisons.  How about these?  Would you draft Embiid over Smart?  The Greek Freak over Olynyk?  The correct answer is everyday and twice on Sunday.

For teams that have mediocre talent at best, the draft should be all about taking the best player available.  NBA readiness, system fit, etc should be tertiary considerations.  The potential for getting a star is worth the risk of a draft pick bust.  Freshman and sophomores drafted for their potential are relatively speaking much more likely to succeed in the NBA than more accomplished juniors and seniors.

That's the sort of thinking that led to freshman Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being selected over junior Damien Lillard.  Or freshman Tyreke Evans and sophomore Jonny Flynn over junior Stephan Curry.

Mike

No, not exactly. Don't you find it ironic that both the players you mentioned (Lillard and Curry) played in smaller schools against weaker competition?

Who did the Greek Freak play against?

And if you need more evidence...

2011 NBA Draft.

#4 Tristan Thompson, freshman from Texas.
#11 Klay Thompson, junior from Washington State.
#16 Nikola Vucevic, junior from USC.

And don't forget...

#30 Jimmy Butler, senior from Marquette.

It's true that great players tend to leave school earlier now.  But plenty of guys who turn out to be busts or average NBA players also leave school earlier as well.

Mike

As I stated before, Ainge should have taken the Greek Freak over KO.  He took the safe accomplished but modest potential player over the raw high potential player who played in a lesser Euro league.  It is exactly the kind of move that I don't want Ainge to make in this draft.
 

What has the greek freak accomplished so far? Danny saw him live before skipping on him on draft night . so did 12-13 other gms.   I like parts of the greek freaks game but he has some major holes. As does KO.  To say he was clearly better pick, nobody knows that yet. 

And like i have stated earlier a freshman considered in the top 5-7 level talent is not the same as a freshman in the 12-17 or 20-30 pick levels.  If the celts are picking 12-15, i rather pick an accomplished sophomore/junior vs a freshman that didnt accomplish much but is considered highly regarded bc he has a 7'5 wingspan. Like Myles Turner

There is a very short list of freshmen picked in the 12-30 areas that have managed to have  successful careers in the nba.

The Greek Freak has accomplished a lot.  He was a very raw talent projected as a late lottery/mid first pick.  He jumped directly from a lesser Euro league to the NBA and in 2 seasons has established himself as a solid NBA starter.  He shows future All-Star potential and won't turn 21 until December.  KO turns 24 next month.  He hasn't established himself as a starter and may just end up as a solid bench player.    If a straight up trade of KO for the Greek Freak presented itself, are you saying you wouldn't make it? 

I'm not sold on Turner's potential yet but Kaminsky's accomplishments (good senior year, decent junior) don't impress me much.  Very few major college seniors accomplish much in the NBA.  Personally I'm hoping that they both go before our pick and that Oubre drops to us.

Or KO could end up as a solid starter.

Giannis is a better jump shot away from being a real good player in this league. He has to change his form completely imo.  His shooting form is so bad he can't dribble, stop and pop. 

KO just has to keep working on his body.  He becomes leaner, stronger and he will be a better player than he is today.

We will see what happens

Giannis is only 20 so he has plenty of time to improve.  His jumper doesn't seem that bad to me but hopefully they're working on it in practice.  During the games, Kidd seems to want him driving the lane all the time.   We have two games against the Bucks in April to evaluate him.  It'll be good to see Middleton play as well.

It's not that Kidd wants him to drive in all the time. It's bc his shot is his biggest weakpoint.  He lacks a midrange game also

Danny saw him live. And he passed up on him.  I trust Danny's decision

I'm really surprised by the performance of Middleton. He has some Paul Pierce in his game. Not too quick/athletic but knows his spots. Headfakes, step backs. Seems like a savvy smart player.

Something has to give with that Bucks middle part of the roster.  Parker, Middleton and Giannis. Middleton could be had and I wouldn't mind bringing him in. Though we really could use more top flight athletes in our lineup right now

I think Ainge blew it.  I think he thought Giannis was too raw and would have to stay a year or two more in Europe before coming to the NBA.  I think he chose Olynyk because he was thought to be NBA ready.  Instead Giannis came directly over and is already a starter.  Other than outside shooting, I can't think of an area where Olynyk is better than Giannis. 

Middleton, Giannis and Parker seem like a great combination assuming Parker comes back strong.  They just need to add a good PG and center.  Why do you think there is an issue? 

[Eddie20]

This is what Ford had to say about Kaminsky and Turner-

Jon (Seattle, WA)

Kaminsky's stock has never been higher. What do you think his ceiling in the NBA is and which team(s) would be the best fit?

Chad Ford  (1:03 PM)

Kaminsky is in the 13 to 20 range right now. And with a huge tournament, he could go even higher. He has a unique game that makes it difficult to find a perfect comp for him at the next level. Maybe Channing Frye? I could actually see him being used as more of a big stretch four than a center at the next level. His three point shooting at his size is his most coveted NBA weapon.

Eric (Deerfield, IL)

Any chance Turner has a terrible game and returns to Texas for another season?

Chad Ford  (1:53 PM)

I think Myles Turner is gone. He's been very up and down all year, but his size and skill set are very coveted in the NBA and most NBA scouts attribute some of the blame on his up and down season to Rick Barnes. He's a lottery pick in the 6 to 12 range.

[Rondo9]

Just read over the thread and I got some comments

1. Harrell is a good player but what is his upside? We need players who could some day end up being elite. Drafting a 21 year old 6'6 pf doesn't really have huge upside. If he's available with the Clippers pick we should take him but our pick is too early.

2. I think Kaminsky is a solid player but if he is the best player available we need to trade up. If we pick at 16 I would prefer Portis to Kaminsky but I think we need to go big either way and a good floor spacing big would help.

3. Someone compared Myles Turner to Thabeet. Turner has the chance to be a great shot blocker but he also is extremely skilled. If Thabeet had Turner's offensive game he wouldn't have been a bust.

4. I agree that WCS could drop since I doubt the Jazz, Philly, and Detroit pick a center and there should be 3 or 4 centers drafted ahead of WCS so maybe he slips. However, we will still need to trade up to at latest the 8-10 pick in order to draft him.

5. LaVert or RHJ would both be great picks with the Clippers pick.

I'm going to say the C's trade up to grab WCS, and then get LaVert or RHJ with the Clippers pick (or we trade the clippers pick and trade two of our seconds to move up and grab one of those guys).

-Turner to Thabeet comparison is good.  Just not that mobile, agile on the court.  Turner can move a little better but he has a strange running technique that imo will result in injuries sooner or later. Again he does not fit with CBS system overall, only for specific situations (Against Hibbert). But as of late we are making the opposing teams follow our lead (go small)

-  Harrell is not 6'6.  He matched up against Brice Johnson last week and he was only a tad shorter. Brice Johnson is 6'9. Harrell is 6'8

- Everyone want the Celts to move up in the draft. How easy is that? When was the last time anyone can remember a team able to move up to top 5 having a 14th pick for example? bc of the way the salary cap/structure is these days, picks are very valuable to keep/develop

Turner is a big who can block shots and step out and hit the 3. That sounds like a perfect fit for Steven's system. Turner probably won't be ready to play away but he has a ton more potential than Harrell and we need to swing for the fences in the draft because we don't need depth.

Draft Express has Harrell as 6'6.5 in shoes. (6'5 w/o shoes) He's certainly not 6'8.

I agree that we won't move into the top 5 but there have been a bunch of trades where a team moves up into the 8-12 range (Chicago moved up last year)

If Harrell is only 6'7 then thats ok still. He has a long wingspan, 8'11 reach and is explosive off the ground.   
Blake Griffin is only 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. Faried only 6'7 with 6'11 wingspan.   

Harrell is a more explosive , intense version of Brandon Bass.  Brandon Bass has fit really well under CBS system.

We would not be grabbing Harrell to be a center but he could guard centers occasionally (like Crowder , due to his strength, won't give up position easily), depending what CBS wants to do out on the floor.   

IF Bass is not brought back, Harrell could fill in that mobile, athletic , ability to guard multiple position pf role and provide even more intensity.

I think Faried is a good comp for Harrell. But Harrell's lack of shooting would give you the same spacing problem Faried does for the Nuggets. As to the blake Griffin comparison, Blake is 6'8.5 with out shoes, Harrell is 6'5.5 without shoes. Harrell hasn't given the indication that he will ever be able to shoot like Bass.

Regardless, I don't think you draft a junior who is already what he will be long term vs a player with a higher ceiling (unless the Junior fits a need). We need the player with the higher ceiling. I don't agree that Harrell fits Steven's system either.

I'm not sure what your basing on what kind of player fits CBS system. But from what i have seen, he tends to like playing players who are tough, works extremely hard, versatile defender/guard multiple positions, able to run end to end  on multiple occasions between whistles, good bbiq.   Able to make the open jump shots is nice also

Harrell outside of ability to make jump shot on a consistent basis (he has improved though, and more willing to shoot it then in the past) meets all the other criteria I listed above.   He is also explosive and is a capable rim protector.   

So tell me, why wouldn't he fit under CBS system?  or does he not fit in with what your looking for?

To me Stevens system likes position versatility, floor spacing and ball handlers.

Harrell is an undersized 4 in the NBA. I don't think you can have him guard anything but 4's in the NBA. So I don't see any positional versatility. He isn't a very good shooter so you won't see him space the floor much and he doesn't have any perimeter ball handling skills.

Stevens likes to go small, when he goes small he usually has lineup that consist of 5 shooters or 4 shooters and one big. Harrell can't be in the 5 shooter lineups because he can't shoot, and if you are playing him as your only big, he won't be able to protect the rim like you would want in that lineup.

A good comp for why he wouldn't succeed is Thomas Robinson. 4's that can't either shoot or block shots aren't succeeding as anything more than back ups in todays NBA.

I like him Harrell just not with our first pick because he doesn't have the upside because of his lack of size and age.

I disagree with many of your points. I have watched several Louisville last and this season games and Harrell can defend more than one position. He is all over the court some games.  See the link below from 6:39. He can guard sfs and keep up even with some guards out on the perimeter. He has good lateral quickness.  He is a strong kid and also will make it tough for some centers to gain inside position. Willing to battle on the inside.

The problem with that statement is that he's doing it on the college level. Covering big college stiffs is a far cry from how that'll translate to the next level.

You seem to be all over the place with your player likes, so I can't quite figure you out. However, the one common denominator is that you seem very keen on college basketball stats/production and thinking that means it'll translate on the next level. For me, I'd much rather take the young 18-19 year old freshman with upside, rather than the 21-22 year old (like your guys Kaminsky, Harrell, etc.) with a limited ceiling.

You'd rather have Kaminsky ahead of Turner and Harrell ahead of say, Cliff Alexander, but imagine for a second what those younger players would be doing on the college level at the same age as Kaminsky and Harrell.

but those players haven't. And we don't know if they will.

I value the proof of hard work and accomplishments more than "potential". How many guys with off the charts potential ever reach it??  Russell Westbrook is the last guy I can think of that didn't accomplish much in college to become a star in the NBA.

Would you draft Perry Jones over Jae Crowder?  Jeremy Lamb over Marcus Smart?

something to think about

Those are strange comparisons.  How about these?  Would you draft Embiid over Smart?  The Greek Freak over Olynyk?  The correct answer is everyday and twice on Sunday.

For teams that have mediocre talent at best, the draft should be all about taking the best player available.  NBA readiness, system fit, etc should be tertiary considerations.  The potential for getting a star is worth the risk of a draft pick bust.  Freshman and sophomores drafted for their potential are relatively speaking much more likely to succeed in the NBA than more accomplished juniors and seniors.

That's the sort of thinking that led to freshman Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being selected over junior Damien Lillard.  Or freshman Tyreke Evans and sophomore Jonny Flynn over junior Stephan Curry.

Mike

No, not exactly. Don't you find it ironic that both the players you mentioned (Lillard and Curry) played in smaller schools against weaker competition?

Who did the Greek Freak play against?

And if you need more evidence...

2011 NBA Draft.

#4 Tristan Thompson, freshman from Texas.
#11 Klay Thompson, junior from Washington State.
#16 Nikola Vucevic, junior from USC.

And don't forget...

#30 Jimmy Butler, senior from Marquette.

It's true that great players tend to leave school earlier now.  But plenty of guys who turn out to be busts or average NBA players also leave school earlier as well.

Mike

As I stated before, Ainge should have taken the Greek Freak over KO.  He took the safe accomplished but modest potential player over the raw high potential player who played in a lesser Euro league.  It is exactly the kind of move that I don't want Ainge to make in this draft.
 

What has the greek freak accomplished so far? Danny saw him live before skipping on him on draft night . so did 12-13 other gms.   I like parts of the greek freaks game but he has some major holes. As does KO.  To say he was clearly better pick, nobody knows that yet. 

And like i have stated earlier a freshman considered in the top 5-7 level talent is not the same as a freshman in the 12-17 or 20-30 pick levels.  If the celts are picking 12-15, i rather pick an accomplished sophomore/junior vs a freshman that didnt accomplish much but is considered highly regarded bc he has a 7'5 wingspan. Like Myles Turner

There is a very short list of freshmen picked in the 12-30 areas that have managed to have  successful careers in the nba.

The Greek Freak has accomplished a lot.  He was a very raw talent projected as a late lottery/mid first pick.  He jumped directly from a lesser Euro league to the NBA and in 2 seasons has established himself as a solid NBA starter.  He shows future All-Star potential and won't turn 21 until December.  KO turns 24 next month.  He hasn't established himself as a starter and may just end up as a solid bench player.    If a straight up trade of KO for the Greek Freak presented itself, are you saying you wouldn't make it? 

I'm not sold on Turner's potential yet but Kaminsky's accomplishments (good senior year, decent junior) don't impress me much.  Very few major college seniors accomplish much in the NBA.  Personally I'm hoping that they both go before our pick and that Oubre drops to us.

Or KO could end up as a solid starter.

Giannis is a better jump shot away from being a real good player in this league. He has to change his form completely imo.  His shooting form is so bad he can't dribble, stop and pop. 

KO just has to keep working on his body.  He becomes leaner, stronger and he will be a better player than he is today.

We will see what happens

Giannis is only 20 so he has plenty of time to improve.  His jumper doesn't seem that bad to me but hopefully they're working on it in practice.  During the games, Kidd seems to want him driving the lane all the time.   We have two games against the Bucks in April to evaluate him.  It'll be good to see Middleton play as well.

It's not that Kidd wants him to drive in all the time. It's bc his shot is his biggest weakpoint.  He lacks a midrange game also

Danny saw him live. And he passed up on him.  I trust Danny's decision

I'm really surprised by the performance of Middleton. He has some Paul Pierce in his game. Not too quick/athletic but knows his spots. Headfakes, step backs. Seems like a savvy smart player.

Something has to give with that Bucks middle part of the roster.  Parker, Middleton and Giannis. Middleton could be had and I wouldn't mind bringing him in. Though we really could use more top flight athletes in our lineup right now

I think Ainge blew it.  I think he thought Giannis was too raw and would have to stay a year or two more in Europe before coming to the NBA.  I think he chose Olynyk because he was thought to be NBA ready.  Instead Giannis came directly over and is already a starter.  Other than outside shooting, I can't think of an area where Olynyk is better than Giannis. 

Middleton, Giannis and Parker seem like a great combination assuming Parker comes back strong.  They just need to add a good PG and center.  Why do you think there is an issue?

I think KO is a better passer than Giannis.