Celtics Rank 4th in Top Young Cores

[crimson_stallion]

Can you post the ranking for those of us without insider?  You don't need to post the whole article (nor should you).


As for the rankings, let's take a look at the top young cores that are out there:

Philadelphia - Okafor, Noel, Embiid, Wroten, Saric, etc.

Milwaukee - MCW, Middleton, Jabari, Giannis, Monroe

Orlando - Peyton, Oladipo, Harris, Gordon, Vucevic, Hezonja

Sacramento - Cousins, McLemore, WCS

Minnesota - Rubio, Lavine, Shabazz, Wiggins, Towns, Dieng, Bennett

Boston - Smart, Sullinger, Olynyk, Young, Crowder, Hunter, Rozier, Mickey

Detroit - Drummond, Johnson, KCP

New Orleans - Davis, Holiday

Phoenix - Knight, Booker, Len, Warren

Utah - Favors, Gobert, Burke, Exum, Lyles, Burks

Denver - Mudiay, Harris, Nurkic




Given the chance to swap cores with one of the above teams, if I were running the Celtics, which ones would I turn down?

Denver.  Maybe Phoenix, but I'd probably go for it. 

I might change my mind on Denver if Mudiay goes out and has a great rookie season, unencumbered by Ty Lawson's presence.

Sacramento (Cousins), New Orleans (Davis), Milwaukee.  Really the only three teams in the list I'd consider swapping places with. 

I consider our young talent better than any other team on that list.

[crimson_stallion]

Golden State wasn't mentioned.  They have Draymond Green, Klay Thompson, and Harrison Barnes that fall into the appropriate age range.  That would be a nice little trio for any team to start with.  Not to mention James McAdoo and Kevin Looney. 

I'd take one Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Kawhi Leonard, Andre Drummond, etc. over every single player on the Celtics.  Heck Wiggins, Towns, Rubio, Lavine, etc. is an incredible young core.  You see this is the problem with the methodology chosen.  Quantity outranks quality and just can't do that in the NBA.

Cousins, Davis, Leonard- fair calls.

Drummond?  Nah, massively overrated guy.  Extremely limited offensive game, and even his defense hasn't been that spectacular - beastly rebounder, but that's about it.

Wiggins?  I'm still not convinced yet.  We'll see where he goes next year.  Same with Rubio and Lavine.  Same with Towns (who was no better than our rookies in SL). 

I don't see why a team like Minny should be ranked above us.  There's really only one young player on the team (Wiggins) who has shown much potential thus far.  The rest have been prett meh.

[D.o.s.]

Doolittle did a nice write-up about the top young cores in the NBA according to the WARP.

http://espn.go.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/13284788/nba-ranking-young-cores-nba

He defines young players as anyone on the roster who won't be 26 by the end of next season, or 25 and younger.

The Bucks were first, but I think they probably moved into the lead with the signing of Monroe.
The Pelicans were second, completely carried by Davis.
The Jazz were third. They have drafted and developed a lot of young talent all over the first round over the past few years.
We were fourth, largely because of the sheer amount of young depth that we have at each position.

We were also ahead of Philly (5th), even though we have been in a rebuild as long as they have.

We were also ahead of the Blazers, even though they have a "superstar" and a lot of young prospects like us.

We were also ahead of the Magic and Pistons, even though most NBA fans generally believe they have a better young core than we do.

Could you please tell me where the Hornets are on this list??

Thanks,

Smitty77

Second.

[D.o.s.]

To that, I think a lot of people have a flawed idea of what people who dare to question the pure sanctity of our rookies and young players are actually saying.

Nah, I think most people get it.  The anti-homer brigade has to differentiate themselves from the rest of us grubby fans, which they think they accomplish by being more "realistic" about our players.

Mike

I don't think it's not being anti-homer to suggest that Marcus Smart might not be a Hall of Fame or All Star talent, or making the observation that Summer League play doesn't mean much in the way of determining how good someone's NBA career ends up being.

I guess I'll leave that persecution complex to others. I still think it's fairly telling that we're "ranked" behind Utah -- and I doubt many on this board would swap cores with them.

[littleteapot]

Doolittle did a nice write-up about the top young cores in the NBA according to the WARP.

http://espn.go.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/13284788/nba-ranking-young-cores-nba

He defines young players as anyone on the roster who won't be 26 by the end of next season, or 25 and younger.

The Bucks were first, but I think they probably moved into the lead with the signing of Monroe.
The Pelicans were second, completely carried by Davis.
The Jazz were third. They have drafted and developed a lot of young talent all over the first round over the past few years.
We were fourth, largely because of the sheer amount of young depth that we have at each position.

We were also ahead of Philly (5th), even though we have been in a rebuild as long as they have.

We were also ahead of the Blazers, even though they have a "superstar" and a lot of young prospects like us.

We were also ahead of the Magic and Pistons, even though most NBA fans generally believe they have a better young core than we do.

Could you please tell me where the Hornets are on this list??

Thanks,

Smitty77

Second.

You mean New Orleans, right?

[Rondo9]

To that, I think a lot of people have a flawed idea of what people who dare to question the pure sanctity of our rookies and young players are actually saying.

Nah, I think most people get it.  The anti-homer brigade has to differentiate themselves from the rest of us grubby fans, which they think they accomplish by being more "realistic" about our players.

Mike

I don't think it's not being anti-homer to suggest that Marcus Smart might not be a Hall of Fame or All Star talent, or making the observation that Summer League play doesn't mean much in the way of determining how good someone's NBA career ends up being.

I guess I'll leave that persecution complex to others. I still think it's fairly telling that we're "ranked" behind Utah -- and I doubt many on this board would swap cores with them.

Sometimes the "realists" take it too far though.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Golden State wasn't mentioned.  They have Draymond Green, Klay Thompson, and Harrison Barnes that fall into the appropriate age range.  That would be a nice little trio for any team to start with.  Not to mention James McAdoo and Kevin Looney. 

I'd take one Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Kawhi Leonard, Andre Drummond, etc. over every single player on the Celtics.  Heck Wiggins, Towns, Rubio, Lavine, etc. is an incredible young core.  You see this is the problem with the methodology chosen.  Quantity outranks quality and just can't do that in the NBA.

Cousins, Davis, Leonard- fair calls.

Drummond?  Nah, massively overrated guy.  Extremely limited offensive game, and even his defense hasn't been that spectacular - beastly rebounder, but that's about it.

Wiggins?  I'm still not convinced yet.  We'll see where he goes next year.  Same with Rubio and Lavine.  Same with Towns (who was no better than our rookies in SL). 

I don't see why a team like Minny should be ranked above us.  There's really only one young player on the team (Wiggins) who has shown much potential thus far.  The rest have been prett meh.

I think you have to give Minnesota a hard look. I was never high on Rubio, but I wouldn't count out Lavine from finding ways to be productive, and Wiggins still has a lot of room for growth. For a span of 36 games in the second half of the season, he averaged 18.6 ppg on 47% shooting and was regularly assigned to guard opponents' top offensive players, including Harden, Paul, and Butler. He seems to be showing improvement.

I agree that Towns stats weren't eye-popping, but he did have a great game against Portland and he shows occasional flashes of being a future stud. He can already do things no one on our roster can. I'd be surprised if he doesn't turn out to be really, really good.
I don't think we have seen anywhere near his or Wiggins' ceiling.

[greece66]

Drummond is massively overrated

And that's when I gave up on this thread.

[D.o.s.]

Doolittle did a nice write-up about the top young cores in the NBA according to the WARP.

http://espn.go.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/13284788/nba-ranking-young-cores-nba

He defines young players as anyone on the roster who won't be 26 by the end of next season, or 25 and younger.

The Bucks were first, but I think they probably moved into the lead with the signing of Monroe.
The Pelicans were second, completely carried by Davis.
The Jazz were third. They have drafted and developed a lot of young talent all over the first round over the past few years.
We were fourth, largely because of the sheer amount of young depth that we have at each position.

We were also ahead of Philly (5th), even though we have been in a rebuild as long as they have.

We were also ahead of the Blazers, even though they have a "superstar" and a lot of young prospects like us.

We were also ahead of the Magic and Pistons, even though most NBA fans generally believe they have a better young core than we do.

Could you please tell me where the Hornets are on this list??

Thanks,

Smitty77

Second.

You mean New Orleans, right?

DERP. Yes. I am dumb.

[D.o.s.]

To that, I think a lot of people have a flawed idea of what people who dare to question the pure sanctity of our rookies and young players are actually saying.

Nah, I think most people get it.  The anti-homer brigade has to differentiate themselves from the rest of us grubby fans, which they think they accomplish by being more "realistic" about our players.

Mike

I don't think it's not being anti-homer to suggest that Marcus Smart might not be a Hall of Fame or All Star talent, or making the observation that Summer League play doesn't mean much in the way of determining how good someone's NBA career ends up being.

I guess I'll leave that persecution complex to others. I still think it's fairly telling that we're "ranked" behind Utah -- and I doubt many on this board would swap cores with them.

Sometimes the "realists" take it too far though.

I think it's an iterative process, so one person says something, another person takes exception and gets a little personal/hyperbolic, the initial person does the same and it just turns into a feedback loop where everyone hates each other and we all get banned.

[crimson_stallion]

Drummond is massively overrated

And that's when I gave up on this thread.

People talk about Drummond as if he's going to be a future superstar.  I've seen NOTHING to indicate that he has that type of potential.

1) Yes, he is an elite rebounder - undisputed fact
2) The guy has absolutely no offensive game outside of three feet
3) The guy cannot hit free throws to save his life
4) He has horrible court feel (0.3 Assists/Turnover for his career so far)

Finally, his Defensive RPM (+0.81) was significantly worse than Greg Monroe (+2.28) despite the fact that:

1) Drummond is proven to be a capable shot-blocker (2.1 Blocks Per 36 over his career)
2) Greg Monroe is not known as a defensive player
3) Both guys played on the same team (hence you can take out team influences)

Put all of the above together and Drummond looks something like:
1) All Jefferson with better rebounding and no jumpshot

or

2) Omer Asik with a better inside game and worse defense

In other words, Drummond looks like the lovechild of Omer Asik and Al Jefferson.

Would that make for a nice player?  Sure.  Would that make for the some uber-dominant beastly superstar some people seem to predict? Umm...no.

In fact if Drummond is a better player than Greg Monroe years from now, I'll be pretty surprised.

I don't know why, but people tend to obsess with looking at raw box score numbers for players, and draw conclusions based on just that...without looking at the actual style of game and skill set those players have. 

Just because Drummond is young (21) and puts up nice career numbers (12 / 11 / 1.7 for his career) that immediately implied that kid is going to be an uber-star.  Why?  Aside from rebounding, what skill / talent does Drummond have that indicates he has superstar potential?

He's a sometimes-dominant inside scorer in a league that's going away from post playing big men.  He gets to the line at a solid rate, but he can't shoot free throws.  He has never shot above 38% from outside 3 feet, and has never shot above 25% from midrange.  For all intents an purposes, he has no hope of ever developing a jump shot.  He turns the ball over three times for every assists he makes.

He's definitely a talented young big, but superstar potential? Hmm...don't know about that. I wouldn't even dream of putting him in the category of a guy like Cousins or Anthony Davis - his potential is not near that level.  If you're lucky he might one day be Dwight Howard good, but that assumes he ever comes close to matching Howard's all round defensive ability - which I question.

[slamtheking]

What about Minnesota? Wiggins and Towns alone should put them in the top 3.

if it was just those 2, the author may have a point but there's more players on that roster like Dieng, Lavine, Shabazz and I think even Rubio still qualifies that would call the author's rankings into question.

C's have a good quantity of young players that could (should) be able to be NBA rotation players but none look like foundation players that you build a championship team on.   Smart has looked better this summer in most aspects but his shooting/shot selection weren't terribly encouraging.

[Moranis]

I'd take one Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Kawhi Leonard, Andre Drummond, etc. over every single player on the Celtics.  Heck Wiggins, Towns, Rubio, Lavine, etc. is an incredible young core.  You see this is the problem with the methodology chosen.  Quantity outranks quality and just can't do that in the NBA.

OK this is taking it too far. Every young guy on our team for Zach Lavine or Kawhi Leonard? Are you kidding me?

It's better to have a dollar than 4 quarters in the NBA. But 4 quarters are better than a slightly shinier quarter.

um, reading comprehension is required to respond to posts.

[Moranis]

Golden State wasn't mentioned.  They have Draymond Green, Klay Thompson, and Harrison Barnes that fall into the appropriate age range. 

If I recall correctly, Thompson is 25 and his birthday is in April, so he doesn't count, unless his birthday falls after the end of the regular season.

But yeah, splitting hairs.  The Warriors are young and have a fantastic core.

depends what you call the end of the season.  basketball reference, for example, shows Thompson and Green as 24 at the end of last season because their birthdays are after the end of the regular season, though may fall during the playoffs.  That is why I included them.

[Moranis]

Drummond is massively overrated

And that's when I gave up on this thread.

People talk about Drummond as if he's going to be a future superstar.  I've seen NOTHING to indicate that he has that type of potential.

1) Yes, he is an elite rebounder - undisputed fact
2) The guy has absolutely no offensive game outside of three feet
3) The guy cannot hit free throws to save his life
4) He has horrible court feel (0.3 Assists/Turnover for his career so far)

Finally, his Defensive RPM (+0.81) was significantly worse than Greg Monroe (+2.28) despite the fact that:

1) Drummond is proven to be a capable shot-blocker (2.1 Blocks Per 36 over his career)
2) Greg Monroe is not known as a defensive player
3) Both guys played on the same team (hence you can take out team influences)

Put all of the above together and Drummond looks something like:
1) All Jefferson with better rebounding and no jumpshot

or

2) Omer Asik with a better inside game and worse defense

In other words, Drummond looks like the lovechild of Omer Asik and Al Jefferson.

Would that make for a nice player?  Sure.  Would that make for the some uber-dominant beastly superstar some people seem to predict? Umm...no.

In fact if Drummond is a better player than Greg Monroe years from now, I'll be pretty surprised.

I don't know why, but people tend to obsess with looking at raw box score numbers for players, and draw conclusions based on just that...without looking at the actual style of game and skill set those players have. 

Just because Drummond is young (21) and puts up nice career numbers (12 / 11 / 1.7 for his career) that immediately implied that kid is going to be an uber-star.  Why?  Aside from rebounding, what skill / talent does Drummond have that indicates he has superstar potential?

He's a sometimes-dominant inside scorer in a league that's going away from post playing big men.  He gets to the line at a solid rate, but he can't shoot free throws.  He has never shot above 38% from outside 3 feet, and has never shot above 25% from midrange.  For all intents an purposes, he has no hope of ever developing a jump shot.  He turns the ball over three times for every assists he makes.

He's definitely a talented young big, but superstar potential? Hmm...don't know about that. I wouldn't even dream of putting him in the category of a guy like Cousins or Anthony Davis - his potential is not near that level.  If you're lucky he might one day be Dwight Howard good, but that assumes he ever comes close to matching Howard's all round defensive ability - which I question.

who said he was going to be an uber star.  He would still be by far the best young player on the Celtics though.