How can Danny possibly keep James Young in this roster?

[Global Celtic]

The thing that bothers me about James Young is that he doesn't seem to have the basic mindset of an NBA player. He doesn't seem to belong on the court, with that kind of speed and that "read and react" requirement. This Jay King tweet during the game in Italy sums up everything about "The James Young Experience".

Jay King ‏@ByJayKing
James Young checks in, gives up transition layup, soon thereafter charges over someone at the other end.

You have it or you don't. Seeing RJ Hunter entering the game and imediately hitting a 3 and then making a couple of good basketball decisions shows me that he's got what it takes to develop into an NBA player (even if he's older). James Young simply doesn't have it. We can wait 2, 3 or 5 years but he will end up playing in the D-League or Europe.

[SHAQATTACK]

the truth is, james young's ultimate value to the C's may be as a throw in in a trade. doesn't mean he won't be a good or decent player in the future. he's not a player you just throw away though. he falls under the Marshon brooks, Gerald green category - teams are always going to take a chance on those kind of players. he's a sweetener in a deal.

he's young, just like green when he was younger and fortunately for green he figured out he had to work to stay in the league.

I hope he doesn't keep getting sent down to the D-league because imo the more guys get sent down the more harm it does in the long run. everyone complains and says his D is horrible...well, he's not going to play better D(or learn to) in the D-league.

I kinda agree......playing in games with little or no defense isn't going to help the worst part of his game.

I'm on fence with him.......I hate us keeping ET ......SMH

[LooseCannon]

He's 20 years old. Everyone knew it would take time. Giving up on him this early into his career and have him develop into something would both be painful and riddle the forum with threads about the mistake.

I, for one, thought that drafting him was a bad idea.

Not understanding the concept of a sunk cost and hanging to him longer than necessarily will riddle the forum with threads about the mistake.  He's like a smaller Perry Jones;  he has the talent to be a very good player, but he seems to lack the intelligence and desire to come close to reaching his potential.

The difference is that he's still younger than all three of the rookies we drafted this year that people are hyped about.

Sunk cost fallacy is a valid point, but you don't draft a guy you should reasonably know will be a multiyear project and then cut him after one season because he's not ready to crack the rotation on a team that's deep in proven role players.


I agree with you, by the way, on cutting Fab Melo, for the same reason -- though I think that decision made more sense because Fab was already pretty old for a rookie when they drafted him.  But why draft a raw project center who is on the older side for a prospect in the first place?  That's what made the Fab Melo pick so bad from the beginning.

He may have been drafted as a multi-year project, but that doesn't mean that the team can't possibly have enough data to re-evaluate after one season and change course.  They've also drafted several players who I think move ahead of Young in terms of priority in trying to develop them, so he's no longer going to be treated as the team's best long-shot hope at developing a significant young player.

Fab Melo was a 21-year-old rookie who was drafted because they hoped he had elite shot blocking and that having one elite skill would be good enough for a rookie to contribute off the bench for a playoff team.

I think that, in general, posters in this thread are over-emphasizing the value of Young's relative youth.

[crimson_stallion]

I'm not a fan of Young's, but he's still very young and possesses natural tools that many, many people in the NBA lack.

What natural tools?

He's got good height (at around 6'7" rounded up) and wingspan (7") sure. But his athleticism is really only average by NBA standards, and he's very lacking in strength. Also his lack of guard skills (passing, ball handling) may force him to spend more time at Small Forward, in which case those height / length advantages become nonexistent.

His court vision is poor, he seems lacking in leadership ability and he seems completely void of the aggression / passion that is needed to become something in this league.

People always cite 'natural tools' with Young, but I really don't get what the fuss is about.  Physically he is pretty much Paul Pierce minus the strength and skill and determination - yet it's the strength, skill and determination that have (for the most part) allowed Pierce to be so great.  He has basically needed those attributes to overcome his lack of great athleticism. 

If you disagree with a draft pick, do you think the C's should jettison the player 1 year in for nothing?

I do.

My stance on this is that everybody makes mistakes and everybody takes gambles sometimes that don't work out as hoped. 

There is nothing wrong with accepting and admitting you were wrong about a player, and letting them walk, if that is the decision that best serves your team at the time.

In fact that's exactly what the smart / wise GM would do.  To hold on to a player that you can see isn't working out, purely because you don't want to admit failure (and be judged by others) would be a very selfish, ignorant and immature response to the situation coming from somebody in such a senior position within a multi-million dollar organisation.
 
Fab Melo and James Young are both guys who were taken as late in the first round as 'upside' gambles, when the primary selections were more sure-fire players (Sully, Smart).  The idea is that on the first pick you take a guy who is a safe bet to work out, and then on the second pick to take a gamble on a guy who is high risk, high upside.  You take that gamble knowing full well that the player may not work out - that's why it's a gamble.  If it doesn't work out, you move on.

It's kind of like when you talk about star basketball players.  People say that the difference between a true offensive superstar and a regular offensive player is that a superstar (like Kobe, Jordan, Harden) has superior confidence in their game, and they will never let a miss / mistake shake their confidence or change the way they play the game.  If they miss a shot one day, they'll take the same shot the next day without a second thought.  Great GM's need to have the same cut throat attitude.  If they make a gamble and they miss on it, they can't let that impact their decision making process.  They need to have the confidence to say that if the same type of deal came up again, they'd still take it.  Admitting mistakes is a strength, not a weakness.

[sofutomygaha]

If you disagree with a draft pick, do you think the C's should jettison the player 1 year in for nothing?

It wouldn't be the first time. There is certainly the potential for D-league sniper James Young to match the career arc of D-league block-monster Fab Melo or D-league jumping bean Jajuan Johnson.

I don't buy it, though, and not just because Young is young (come on, people must have something better to say by now). Young is an excellent shooter and he can get that shot off in the NBA off the catch and off the dribble. He was a good offensive player in the D-league; most players who share that distinction are freelancers, but he stuck hard to the role he was supposed to play. It seems like conventional wisdom around here that last year was a lost year for him and I don't think that's true at all.

There's not enough to go on for fans to call for the Fabbing of James Young. If he doesn't have "it," though, the staff and players working with him in practice know a lot better than we do from such a tiny sample of game time. If they do Fab him, I will take that as a sign that he's a stiff and if I was there working with him day to day I'd know that.

[littleteapot]

I do.

My stance on this is that everybody makes mistakes and everybody takes gambles sometimes that don't work out as hoped. 

There is nothing wrong with accepting and admitting you were wrong about a player, and letting them walk, if that is the decision that best serves your team at the time.

In fact that's exactly what the smart / wise GM would do.  To hold on to a player that you can see isn't working out, purely because you don't want to admit failure (and be judged by others) would be a very selfish, ignorant and immature response to the situation coming from somebody in such a senior position within a multi-million dollar organisation.
 
Fab Melo and James Young are both guys who were taken as late in the first round as 'upside' gambles, when the primary selections were more sure-fire players (Sully, Smart).  The idea is that on the first pick you take a guy who is a safe bet to work out, and then on the second pick to take a gamble on a guy who is high risk, high upside.  You take that gamble knowing full well that the player may not work out - that's why it's a gamble.  If it doesn't work out, you move on.

It's kind of like when you talk about star basketball players.  People say that the difference between a true offensive superstar and a regular offensive player is that a superstar (like Kobe, Jordan, Harden) has superior confidence in their game, and they will never let a miss / mistake shake their confidence or change the way they play the game.  If they miss a shot one day, they'll take the same shot the next day without a second thought.  Great GM's need to have the same cut throat attitude.  If they make a gamble and they miss on it, they can't let that impact their decision making process.  They need to have the confidence to say that if the same type of deal came up again, they'd still take it.  Admitting mistakes is a strength, not a weakness.

My point is you don't know if you're wrong or not after a year.

If you take a guy on potential you should expect him to struggle in his first year. When we took James Young, I'm sure we had a list of things he had to improve on and what the timeline is and I don't think the timeline should be 1 year to crack the rotation on a very deep backcourt.

BTW I do think it's a strength of Danny's that he is not afraid to appear stupid and doesn't stay rigid.

[crimson_stallion]

I don't buy it, though, and not just because Young is young (come on, people must have something better to say by now). Young is an excellent shooter and he can get that shot off in the NBA off the catch and off the dribble. He was a good offensive player in the D-league; most players who share that distinction are freelancers, but he stuck hard to the role he was supposed to play. It seems like conventional wisdom around here that last year was a lost year for him and I don't think that's true at all.

Problem is though, is that really true?

Over the past couple of years we've seen James Young in College, in the D-League, in the Summer League, in the Pre-season (one game only so far though) and in the actual NBA.

Out of ALL those avenues so far, the only place where he shot an 'above average' percentage from three was in the D-League.

In 40 College games he shot 82/235 (34.9%)
In 3 Summer League games @ Salt Lake City) he shot 2/13 (15.4%)
In 2 Summer League @ Vegas he shot 3/9 (33.3%)
In 31 NBA games he shot 17/66 (25.8%)
In 17 D-League games he shot 68/154 (44.2%)

If you take out the D-League games then in a total of 76 games (between college, summer league and the NBA) he has shot a combined 104/323 - a measly 32%.

Even if you include the highly inflated D-League percentages (which seem entirely unsustainable, based on what he's shot elsewhere) then it's a combined 172/477 (36%) which is still only barely above average for an NBA Shooting Guard.

Three point shooting seems to be this kid's one selling point, and yet even in that area I fail to see what all the fuss is about.

[littleteapot]

I don't buy it, though, and not just because Young is young (come on, people must have something better to say by now).

That's why he was such a great pick. Even in 30 years he'll still be Young.

[86MaxwellSmart]

James Young is awful---Less talent then Fab Melo. I don't care how "good" he looked in Maine either---Fab once had like 12 blocks in a game I believe....Danny's only reason to keep him around, is to hope someone is stupid enough to take him in a multi player deal.

[crimson_stallion]

My point is you don't know if you're wrong or not after a year.

If you take a guy on potential you should expect him to struggle in his first year. When we took James Young, I'm sure we had a list of things he had to improve on and what the timeline is and I don't think the timeline should be 1 year to crack the rotation on a very deep backcourt.

I'm not entirely sure that's true.

Guys like Danny and Brad have seen countless young prospects over their years.  They have plenty of first-hand experience in judging what type of attributes tend to translate from prospect to legit NBA player.

Personally, I look at James Young's actual abilities and the way he plays (not just the stats) and I don't see an NBA player.  I don't see the attitude of an NBA player.  I don't see the skills of an NBA player.  I don't see the physical talent of anything beyond a so-so role player.

I see a guy who lacks the speed and ball handling skills to get to (and finish at) the basket.  I see a guy who lacks the court vision and basketball IQ to ever be a quality passer / playmaker.  I see poor defensive effort and instincts.  I see a lack of post game.  I see a guy who lacks the motivation and the competitiveness to become ever strive for (and hence achieve) greatness.

On the plus side I can see a guy who has the potential to be a nice spot-up shooter, and a guy who rebounds pretty well for a SG / SF.

Honestly - I look at James Young's game and I see an upside of Avery Bradley, but without the defense and without the motor...and Avery Bradley without the defense and motor would stuggle to make an NBA roster.

Sure Young is taller than Bradley, but he's also far less athletic so that mostly evens out the physicals IMHO.

If I'm Danny then maybe I look at Young right now and say to myself "this kid's ceiling is that of a role player".  The I look at my current roster, filled 14 deep with players and prospects who can really play.   Then I look back at Young and ask myself - "should I really waste a roster spot on this kid, knowing he'll probably give me nothing this year"?

In the end I'd just let him go.  In the unlikely even that anther team signs him and he breaks out, good luck to them.  No sleep lost.

[sofutomygaha]

I don't buy it, though, and not just because Young is young (come on, people must have something better to say by now). Young is an excellent shooter and he can get that shot off in the NBA off the catch and off the dribble. He was a good offensive player in the D-league; most players who share that distinction are freelancers, but he stuck hard to the role he was supposed to play. It seems like conventional wisdom around here that last year was a lost year for him and I don't think that's true at all.

Problem is though, is that really true?

Over the past couple of years we've seen James Young in College, in the D-League, in the Summer League, in the Pre-season (one game only so far though) and in the actual NBA.

Out of ALL those avenues so far, the only place where he shot an 'above average' percentage from three was in the D-League.

In 40 College games he shot 82/235 (34.9%)
In 3 Summer League games @ Salt Lake City) he shot 2/13 (15.4%)
In 2 Summer League @ Vegas he shot 3/9 (33.3%)
In 31 NBA games he shot 17/66 (25.8%)
In 17 D-League games he shot 68/154 (44.2%)

If you take out the D-League games then in a total of 76 games (between college, summer league and the NBA) he has shot a combined 104/323 - a measly 32%.

Even if you include the highly inflated D-League percentages (which seem entirely unsustainable, based on what he's shot elsewhere) then it's a combined 172/477 (36%) which is still only barely above average for an NBA Shooting Guard.

Three point shooting seems to be this kid's one selling point, and yet even in that area I fail to see what all the fuss is about.

That's a heck of a cherry to pick, my friend! He's 20, and you are probing his percentages when you throw out the vast majority of his first and only year of pro basketball.

[littleteapot]

I can't imagine that another team wouldn't immediately pick him up if we just waived James Young.

Brad and Danny have seen countless prospects, but the best sports minds in the world can't accurately predict player development. For extreme examples, look at Steve Nash and Ben Wallace. For more normal examples look at Khris Middleton, our own Amir Johnson and Evan Turner, Kyle Lowry, Maurice Speights etc. Plenty of teams dumped players who ended up finding legitimate rotation roles.

[PhoSita]

I think that, in general, posters in this thread are over-emphasizing the value of Young's relative youth.

Well, I think you're downplaying the fact that teenagers almost never play very well in the NBA, Young was drafted as a bench player from a school that doesn't help players actually improve any at basketball, just get them drafted, and he's still developing physically and mentally.

Wait a year or two with Young.

I know people are all excited about PJ3 and Evan Turner for some reason, but there's really no urgency to cut James Young from this roster.  Especially since he's one of the few assets on the roster with any significant potential to improve from what he is right now.

[hwangjini_1]

judging someone at the age of twenty for a nba player is never too young to pass final and complete judgement. one year at the age of 19 is all many of us need to project the future of young. i have never seen any player improve with age and coaching, ever. what we saw last year is young's ceiling and to keep him would be a disaster rivaling or surpassing that of the hindenburg.

oh...the humanity.

let's not forget how this approach of judging a young player based on their rookie year let us all see just how crappy bradley would be.

at a ripe old age of 20, bradley clearly demonstrated his inability to be an nba player during his rookie year. 1.7 points per game? 0.5 rebounds? 0.4 assists? yes, LESS THAN A REBOUND AND AN ASSIST IN EACH GAME!

this...
screams...
loser!

bust city, here we come. why ainge has continued to hang on to this loser is a mystery. let's fire ainge...even if the population of cb lacks any ability to do so. could someone please start crowd funding so we can buy out ainge's contract and replace with someone, or thing, better. maybe some form of marsupial or a quasi-domesticated weasel?

i wish i could dig up those telling  cb threads on what a bust bradley was so we could all bask in our collective wisdom together and revel in those insights. ubunto cb style.

folks...how many Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.ing Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.ned bull Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline. shortsighted emotional knee jerk threads on young do we have to endure? wait before judging. be patient and let' see and assess after year 3.

and if nothing else, please check and see what other threads have been written prior to authoring a new one.

[Monkhouse]

Danny can afford to keep Young, because hes infinitely more valuable than Perry Jones.

Everyone knows what Jones is capable of, and he'll most certainly get cut first before Young ever does.

Cost controlled rookie who is still young, and still has potential as a shooter?

A team like the 76ers wouldn't mind offering something in return for value, especially since their search in a decent back court has been waging on for a while now.