Danny Ainge Missed Again - Terry Rozier

[aingeforthree]

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago when people were posting:

"Danny Ainge missed again - Avery Bradley"

[Evantime34]

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago when people were posting:

"Danny Ainge missed again - Avery Bradley"

TP!

Way too early to make a decision, especially at point guard where development is often slower than other positions.

[CFAN38]

Personally drafting Terry Rozier has been a bust for us considering who we could have drafted.  Ainge decided it was a great idea to draft another point guard when we needed a big to play power forward or center.  Needless to say the one that we should have drafted has now gotten the Bulls excited.  Bobby Portis, I wanted to draft him in this draft so bad.  It's almost sickening to see how great he's playing for the Bulls when Danny Ainge didn't draft him.  Just needed to let this out.

Going back to the original post.

To call a Rookie who hasnt even played meaningful minutes at this point a BUST is crazy. Rozier has yet to earn a role yet in the celtics very crowded back-court and that was to be expected. What he has done is excelled in his 7 games in the D-League averaging 18pts 6rb 10ast and 2stl. For a player who is regarded as a project at the PG this is a very promising stat line. You also have to take into consideration his long term physical projections. Terry has an elite physical profile for a PG. When you look at his size, length, quickness and explosiveness I have liitle doubt that he is in the top 25% of point guards athletically. I will agree that I was shocked by the pick and wondered where he fit but can clearly see why DA made the pick. When drafting outside the lottery if a player if available with an elite physical profile for his position he is hard to pass up. Maybe he becomes Marcus Banks 2.0 but at least he has the foundation necessary to be an elite NBA player.

As for Portis I agree that I would have been thrilled if the Cs drafted him but unlike Rozier he really lacks the high ceiling. I'm not saying ever pick has to have the potential to be an all-star but when a team is super deep like the Cs are why not aim high and risk missing? You also must take into consideration that Portis would likely be in the same boat as Rozier and Mickey this season. With 6 legit NBA players currently on the Cs roster a rookie big man drafted outside of the lottery is unlikely to see minutes this season. Mickey is the prime example of a guy who seems to be performing at a level in the D-League that more then warrants minutes with the real team but they are just too deep.       

[jdpapa3]

Isn't it a problem that we drafted a guy we knew full well would get 0 pt? Even if he's got potential, how's he going to develop when the team is built in a way that doesn't even give him garbage time minutes?

No, thinking about draft picks as far as the immediate year after the draft is a fool's errand. Unless you have two high back to back picks and take two PGs or two non-shooting Cs or something like that. You draft who you think is the BPA every time.

[PhoSita]

Of course it's a problem to draft a guy who has no path to playing time.

It's hard for the player to function as much of a trade asset because all you've got to show other teams is D-League highlights, and other teams know you have very little leverage since the guy isn't in your near-term plans.

The player also serves little value to your current roster aside from giving you some very deep depth.

All of that is fine if you're talking about a raw project who will take a few years to turn into a player.  James Young is an example of that.

But why draft a 21 year old, who'll be almost 25 by the time his rookie contract his up, only to park his butt on the bench for a couple years?  The benefit of drafting an older prospect is that you stand a good chance of getting somebody who can contribute early on, a guy who already knows how to play.

As it stands, it seems like Ainge basically used the #16 pick in this past draft just to replace Phil Pressey.

[BballTim]

Of course it's a problem to draft a guy who has no path to playing time.

It's hard for the player to function as much of a trade asset because all you've got to show other teams is D-League highlights, and other teams know you have very little leverage since the guy isn't in your near-term plans.

The player also serves little value to your current roster aside from giving you some very deep depth.

All of that is fine if you're talking about a raw project who will take a few years to turn into a player.  James Young is an example of that.

But why draft a 21 year old, who'll be almost 25 by the time his rookie contract his up, only to park his butt on the bench for a couple years?  The benefit of drafting an older prospect is that you stand a good chance of getting somebody who can contribute early on, a guy who already knows how to play.

As it stands, it seems like Ainge basically used the #16 pick in this past draft just to replace Phil Pressey.

  You seem to feel that the Celts roster (in terms of guards) is set in stone for the next few years. I'm not sure that's the case.

[jdpapa3]

Of course it's a problem to draft a guy who has no path to playing time.

Nah, a problem is drafting a player at 16 and penciling them in the rotation for a playoff bound team.

[PhoSita]

Of course it's a problem to draft a guy who has no path to playing time.

Nah, a problem is drafting a player at 16 and penciling them in the rotation for a playoff bound team.

Why should we treat the rotation of a team that might make it into the playoffs as a bottom seed as if it's inviolable?  This isn't the Garnett-era Celts we're talking about here.  Giving playing time to a rookie isn't going to cost the team a shot at a championship.

  You seem to feel that the Celts roster (in terms of guards) is set in stone for the next few years. I'm not sure that's the case.

Thomas, Smart, and Bradley are a few of the team's best players.  I wouldn't rule out any or all of them being gone in a year or two, by any means, but it would surprise me.

Rozier could very well earn the backup point guard role once Evan Turner is gone.  Still, my feeling on Rozier all along has been that, unless he was far and away the best talent remaining, it would've made a lot more sense to draft a guy who filled a more obvious need, and thus stood a greater chance of making it into the rotation in a substantial role. 

I guess Ainge probably felt Rozier was clearly the best player available at that spot.  We haven't really seen anything to support that though, so far.

[rollie mass]

rozier has had summer league pre season,pre season games a trip to europe and some game time and practices in waltham and gone on the road-
has front row seats watching isaiah,smart and even rj get time-now its d league time to practice during games with mickey
rozier has watched the work habits of crowder and others-been part of the kobe events and the double overtime loss to one of the best shooters ever
thats a rookie season and its still going on


 

[BballTim]

  You seem to feel that the Celts roster (in terms of guards) is set in stone for the next few years. I'm not sure that's the case.

Thomas, Smart, and Bradley are a few of the team's best players.  I wouldn't rule out any or all of them being gone in a year or two, by any means, but it would surprise me.

  Among the best players on a mid-level non-contending team with no stars on the roster. I don't know why anybody on the team being traded would be much of a surprise.

[Evantime34]

Of course it's a problem to draft a guy who has no path to playing time.

It's hard for the player to function as much of a trade asset because all you've got to show other teams is D-League highlights, and other teams know you have very little leverage since the guy isn't in your near-term plans.

The player also serves little value to your current roster aside from giving you some very deep depth.

All of that is fine if you're talking about a raw project who will take a few years to turn into a player.  James Young is an example of that.

But why draft a 21 year old, who'll be almost 25 by the time his rookie contract his up, only to park his butt on the bench for a couple years?  The benefit of drafting an older prospect is that you stand a good chance of getting somebody who can contribute early on, a guy who already knows how to play.

As it stands, it seems like Ainge basically used the #16 pick in this past draft just to replace Phil Pressey.

I think NBA rosters at this stage in the teams development are too fluid to be worried about drafting a player who is blocked from playing time.

After not being happy with the Rozier pick initially, I think he was a good swing for the fences type pick. He is very athletic and a hard worker, with him I worry about his understanding of the game, but his athleticism gives him high potential.

[ssspence]

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago when people were posting:

"Danny Ainge missed again - Avery Bradley"

I don't remember much blow back on the Bradley pick. Folks freaked briefly while they trialed him at PG, before he league went small, and they realized he could play his natural position.

Rozier, on the other hand, is a PG. And what bothers me about him is his handle. He sorta cradles the ball like a football for these long, jerky dribbles. It's not uh... It's not good. Needs to get it tighter to his hip / quicker / more efficient.

[PhoSita]

  You seem to feel that the Celts roster (in terms of guards) is set in stone for the next few years. I'm not sure that's the case.

Thomas, Smart, and Bradley are a few of the team's best players.  I wouldn't rule out any or all of them being gone in a year or two, by any means, but it would surprise me.

  Among the best players on a mid-level non-contending team with no stars on the roster. I don't know why anybody on the team being traded would be much of a surprise.

Mostly because Ainge loves his combo guards and all three seem to me like guys whose value to the Celts is very likely to outweigh the value that other teams might see in them.

Historically, that's been a recipe for Ainge holding onto guys rather than trading them.  He doesn't like to trade guys for less than what they're worth to the team.


Bradley seems like he could be a trade candidate, especially if there's an opportunity to acquire a wing scorer with more size and the ability to get to the rim.  That said, SG is a pretty weak position league wide, so it might be difficult to get an upgrade.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago when people were posting:

"Danny Ainge missed again - Avery Bradley"

I don't remember much blow back on the Bradley pick. Folks freaked briefly while they trialed him at PG, before he league went small, and they realized he could play his natural position.

Rozier, on the other hand, is a PG. And what bothers me about him is his handle. He sorta cradles the ball like a football for these long, jerky dribbles. It's not uh... It's not good. Needs to get it tighter to his hip / quicker / more efficient.

Rozier is actually a SG trying to be molded as a PG because they see potential for him as a SG/PG type that can run an offense as well. Someone like that could be the perfect type of player to pair up with Marcus Smart who is a PG but still has ways to go to run an offense, both play good defense.

So we'll see how it goes in the end. But Rozier's natural position is SG.

[chambers]

This discussion is so pointless.
How can anyone judge Rozier on 16 games and 6 minutes a game?
He's taken 34 shots in the NBA, mostly in garbage time.