Derek Bodner's Big Board (very interesting)

[Eddie20]

He writes for DX, USA Today, and also on the Sixers for Philly Mag. The last being why he'll discuss how some the players would fit on the Sixers. Still, his overall top 10 is very interesting and he provides a VERY detailed scouting breakdown on each player, one (or more) of which could end up in Celtics Green.

http://www.phillymag.com/news/2016/05/10/2016-nba-draft-big-board-version-1/

Keep in mind, this is my big board, which means it’s my own personal rankings, not how I predict the draft will unfold. If you want my latest mock draft, you can go check out the one I publish for USA Today. Also, this is very Sixers-centric, which basically means it’s what I would do if I were making the decisions for the Sixers. How does that impact the rankings? Not much, as when I’m looking at a top-5 pick, I’m mostly going for the best player available. If the Sixers had the talent to worry about fit, they’d likely not be in the position to draft in the top 5.


Tier 1
1. Ben Simmons, freshman, power forward, LSU
34.9 minutes, 19.2 points, 11.8 rebounds, 4.8 assists, 2.0 steals per game, 56% FG%, 33.3% 3PT%, 67% FT%.

Ben Simmons is still the best talent in this draft, a stance I have held firm on the entire season. Yes, Brandon Ingram’s jump shot and two-way potential make him an easy fit on any team, but that’s not really the goal here. With how uncertain the Sixers future is, having a guy who you have to build around isn’t something to be avoided, especially when he has the kind of elite court vision and creativity Simmons has. That creativity, at a position that isn’t typically asked to initiate the offense and against defenders who aren’t frequently asked to deny dribble penetration or fight through high pick and rolls, could put an incredible amount of pressure on a defense, and also make roster construction much easier down the line. Point guards like Patrick Beverley, who you otherwise might focus on what he can’t do (mediocre playmaking and court vision, not a volume scorer, etc), you can now target because of his elite defense and reliable catch-and-shoot shot. Simmons’ unique skill set opens up the possibility for those type of players.

You’ll frequently hear people say “Simmons has great vision for a power forward”. No, he has great vision. No qualifiers are needed. In the Sports-Reference database, his 158 assists are the most by a freshman forward (small forward, power forward, combo forward, power forward/center) dating back to the 1993-94 season, and that’s in spite of the fact that his teammates, more or less, couldn’t shoot, and the one real legitimate shooter LSU had, Keith Hornsby, suffered through injury problems. It’s no coincidence that LSU’s season imploded when Hornsby went down for the year.

Much is made about how Simmons won’t be able to just bully his way into the paint in the NBA, that his lack of shooting will catch up to him. To a degree, that’s certainly true. But the spacing he’ll get offensively should be worlds better on a competent NBA team than it was at LSU. From rule changes (both hand checking and illegal defense), to the longer three-point line, to the NBA’s emphasis on spacing, the current league is tailor-made for a player of Simmons’ skill set to succeed.

At the top of the draft, I want unique, dominant, outlier skills. Simmons’ combination of athleticism and elite, preternatural, almost unprecedented court vision at his position has the chance to be the most outlier skill to come out of this draft.

I also think his defense has a chance of improving down the line, too, especially in today’s switch-heavy league, as Simmons was horribly miscast as a 5-man in a 2-3 zone, like he spent much of the season doing at LSU. The only way this pick changes for me is if you go through the interview process and major red flags are exposed, which isn’t 100% out of the question with how LSU ended their season, but of which I’m going to need more verification of than a few games at the end of a college season to rule out his unique talent.

2. Brandon Ingram, freshman, small forward, Duke
34.6 minutes, 17.3 points, 6.8 rebounds, 2.0 assists, 1.1 steals, 1.4 blocks per game, 44.2% FG%, 41.0% 3PT%, 68.2% FT%

I like Brandon Ingram. A lot. I’d be happy if he ended up being a Sixer. I think he’s going to end up being a wing who can be effective both off the ball in catch and shoot situations and cutting to the basket, but also on the ball creating with those deceptive, long strides. I thought his body control and touch around the hoop were pleasant surprises and that, along with his height and unique physical attributes, really set him apart as a scorer, although I’d like to see him get more comfortable pulling up off the dribble to really develop into that go-to scorer I think people want him to be.

I do think he’s currently being overrated just a tad, though. I don’t think his first step or overall athleticism are as good as some advertise. Kevin Durant comparisons just aren’t fair. Second, his defensive reputation exceeds his current defensive production. His lateral mobility isn’t great, nor does he change direction at an elite level, and he doesn’t get into a good, low defensive stance as frequently as he should. His incredible length gives him pretty good recovery potential, and certainly helped him mask those deficiencies at the collegiate level, but that’s going to be harder in the pro’s. I do think his problems are mostly correctable and I do think he develops into a two-way player, but he’s not there yet, at least consistently.

Tier 2
3. Dragan Bender, 18 years old, power forward, Maccabi Tel Aviv (Israeli League)
12.2 minutes, 4.3 points, 2.3 rebounds, 0.6 assists, 0.5 steals, 0.7 blocks per game, 42.6% FG%, 36.8% 3PT%, 71.9% FT%

Even in this pace-and-space offensive era, I think we underrate perimeter shooting and floor spacing, especially in the front court. I also think it’s hard to overstate the necessity of big men who have the lateral mobility to switch on pick and rolls and defend multiple positions. Finding somebody who can do both is not only rare, but a real competitive advantage. In this sense, Dragan Bender could be as much of a white whale as Kristaps Porzingis has proven to be for New York.

People are going to focus a lot on what Bender can’t do. They’ll focus on his frame, his missed rotations, not being an elite shot blocker, limited low post game despite his height, his lack of projectability as a go-go scorer, on playing just 12 minutes per game. All valid. But when you have a big man who can space the floor and also be a versatile defender, those are the kind of players who have the chance to contribute on every trip down the floor, on both ends of the floor, and you’re not really relying on a huge amount of skill development for him to be useful, as he doesn’t really need to be a complete player to have a role in the NBA. Even if he doesn’t develop into the first, or even second, option on a team, he’s going to have a lot of value, especially on a team that’s going to look to build a two-man game centered around a currently-unspecified-point-guard and one of their big men prospects (hopefully Joel Embiid, if he stays healthy).

Tier 3
4. Kris Dunn, junior, point guard, Providence
33 minutes, 16.4 points, 5.3 rebounds, 6.2 assists, 2.5 steals, 3.5 turnovers per game, 44.8% FG%, 37.2% 3PT%, 69.5% FT%

If there’s two things I don’t like in a point guard prospect, it’s turnovers and an inconsistent jumper. Kris Dunn has both of them in spades.

His turnovers can partly be blamed by Providence’s poor floor spacing, but not all of it. He simply makes too many poor, careless, borderline irresponsible decisions with the ball. His shooting is maddeningly inconsistent, draining a soft pull-up jumper one possession, then nearly breaking the backboard with a miss three feet off to the left on the next, with little difference in pressure from his defender. His pull-up and midrange game are better than a complete non-shooter, but his three-point shot is so inconsistent that his 37 percent mark isn’t very representative of his ability either, in my opinion.

That being said his physical profile — 6’4″ size, 6’9″ wingspan, elite elevation in traffic, ability to change direction and explode on a dime — is so great, and this draft so relatively weak after the top 2, that I’m willing to take a chance. Despite being a 4-year junior and 22 years old, his first two years were practically throwaway years because of shoulder injuries, so maybe he can correct some of these potentially fatal flaws. His defense, while overrated because of his gaudy steal numbers, still has the chance to be a huge plus at his position. There’s enough to work with here that I’m willing to take a chance. And, really, at this point in the draft, you’re taking a chance on any of them.

I recently wrote a detailed scouting report on Kris Dunn for DraftExpress. Feel free to read that at DraftExpress.com.

5. Timothe Luwawu, 21 years old, shooting guard, Mega Leks (Adriatic League)
30.9 minutes, 14.6 points, 4.8 rebounds, 2.7 assists, 1.7 steals per game, 39.9% FG%, 37.5% 3PT%, 68.9% FT%

This is the point where my big board starts to diverge from consensus.

I’m in a little bit of a weird position with Timothe Luwawu, a french wing currently playing in the Adriatic League. I was a fan of Luwawu heading into last year’s draft, when he was playing in anonymity in France’s second division. Since then he’s improved in a big way, finishing with averages of 14.6 points, 4.8 rebounds, and 2.7 assists per game, while shooting 37 percent from three-point range for Mega Leks.

That being said, Luwawu has developed a little bit of a cult following among some, likely fueled, in part, because of the uninspiring crop of prospects in this range of the draft. I’m not sure he’s as good of a prospect as some are making him out to be.

His defense, right now, is more potential than actualized production, as his defensive fundamentals, and focus, have him getting beat more than somebody with his quickness and physical tools should. Like Ingram, however, this should be corrected with time, experience, and coaching. The other area I think he’s overrated is as a scorer. In some ways, he’s a little bit like Andre Iguodala* in that you see him pull off these incredibly athletic dunks in transition and think he should be able to create at a high level off the bounce, but then he’ll struggle to finish at the rim when contested in the half court. He shies away from contact and doesn’t really have the touch to make up for that, and compounds that by being out of control and taking shots that he shouldn’t. I think this is probably the bigger long-term concern.

Still, his improved shooting is important, he has the size and athleticism to develop into an effective three-and-d wing player, and he has the ball skills and first step to potentially develop into more than that. My suggestion would be to go in hoping for a versatile, valuable role player, and be pleasantly surprised if he develops into more than that.

Disclaimer: When I say he’s a little bit like Andre Iguodala, I’m talking about his finishing at the rim, not his overall level as a prospect. While the two share some similarities, Iguodala’s defense is the exception to the rule, even among those with elite physical tools. I am not projecting Luwawu to be that level of a defensive player.

Tier 4
6. Denzel Valentine, senior, point guard/shooting guard, Michigan State
33 minutes, 19.2 points, 7.5 rebounds, 7.8 assists, 1.0 steals, 2.7 turnovers per game, 46.2% FG%, 44.4% 3PT%, 85.3% FT%

This is the tier where I start to go “Well, they have skill, but….”

It’s also the tier where things start to get really fluid. Depending on my day and mood, I could re-order these next three pretty easily.

Valentine’s interesting because he’s a wing prospect who might not be capable of defending anybody on the court, but he’s the rare non-defender who I absolutely love. His perimeter shot has steadily improved over the years, hitting on 44.4 percent of his 234 three-point attempts as a senior. He can shoot off the catch, off the dribble, and off of screens. He can change direction effortlessly with the ball in his hands. He’s crafty off of pick and rolls and knows how to get into the paint despite his limited athleticism. He rebounds the heck out of the ball for his position. But most impressive, to me, is his decision making, which goes beyond the 7.8 assists, to just 2.7 turnovers, he averaged per game, and a skill that I think is as important as any to team success.

I will always have a spot on my roster for elite decision makers, and Valentine was as good as any in the country over the past two seasons, making snap decisions and quick reads with the ball in his hand, and he doesn’t need to dominate the ball to make use of his passing talent. His defense is bad, and you’re going to have to try to hide him on the opponents worst wing player, but I think he’s a smart enough defender that, if you can get him to fully buy in on that side of the ball (something which should be easier playing less minutes and carrying less of an offensive burden), you should be able to accomplish this on most nights, and I think he absolutely has a role in this league.

This is also the part of the draft where just because I have somebody rated 6th doesn’t mean I think they’re going to be a star. A pre-draft ranking is in relation to the rest of the draft class, not the rest of the league. The rest of the draft class has enough uncertainty that I’m willing to “settle” for a role player I have a high degree of confidence in, and whose skill set I really value, which is why Valentine (and, to a lesser extent, Luwawu) is rated so highly for me.

7. Wade Baldwin, sophomore, point guard, Vanderbilt
30.4 minutes, 14.1 points, 4.0 rebounds, 5.2 assists, 1.2 steals, 2.8 turnovers per game, 42.7% FG%, 40.6% 3PT%, 79.9% FT%

Another guy who I’m higher on than consensus, but I think some on the statistical community overrate slightly.

Baldwin’s intrigue starts around his physical profile, standing 6’3″ in height, with a 6’10” wingspan, and a strong, developed upper body. Like most young guards, his attentiveness frequently wanes on the defensive end, and his fundamentals need some work. But his wingspan, his lateral mobility, and his strength give him potential on the defensive side of the court few have, and he has a willingness to defend suggests he has a decent chance of reaching that potential down the line.

That defensive potential at the point of attack, and one without any glaring weaknesses (isolation, pick and roll, playing the passing lanes, etc), is the main reason he’s so high for me. His offensive game is mostly potential at this point in time. He’s a good spot-up shooter, which, along with his defense, makes him very intriguing in a scenario where the Sixers run their offense through a non-traditional position, like they might with Ben Simmons. His shooting breaks down a bit off the dribble which, combined with his below average ball handling, lack of misdirection moves, and not showing much feel for changing speeds, limits his shot creation in the half court, and something he has to improve upon.

I’d also like to see more of an in-between game from him. Not only the pull-up jumper, which is very inconsistent, but some form of a floater in the lane, if for no other reason than to make him less predictable when driving to the basket. He got to the line at an elite level in college, but when he goes up against NBA level interior defenders I think he could struggle a bit, at least early in his career.

That being said, there’s enough there — size, defense, spot-up shooting — that I’m willing to take a gamble here and hope he develops more than the norm.

I recently wrote a detailed scouting report of Wade Baldwin for DraftExpress. You can read that at DraftExpress.com.

8. Jamal Murray, freshman, shooting guard, Kentucky
35.2 minutes, 20.0 points, 5.2 rebounds, 2.2 assists, 1.0 steals, 2.3 turnovers per game, 45.4% FG%, 40.8% 3PT%, 78.3% FT%

Murray can shoot. He can shoot really, really well. He can shoot on the move, after running off of a double baseline screen, as well as any young player in this draft. That skill, both in terms of having the knowledge to use those off-the-ball screens and having the footwork to consistently, and accurately, get that shot up is impressive. I also think that skill — shooting not only off the ball, but on the move — puts a lot of pressure on a defense, as it requires multiple defenders acting in concert with each other to effectively stop. Any time an offensive player can force multiple defenders to pay attention to him, it’s going to open up the offense, even more than a shooter typically would.

I also think Murray has more stuff as a passer than perhaps he is given credit for. It’s a weird thing to say, since his game really took off when Kentucky moved him off the ball and limited his responsibilities creating in the half court, but when you limit his shot creation to attacking closeouts and making the correct reads out of that, I think his decision making becomes a positive rather than the negative it was earlier on in the season. That makes him slightly more than a one-trick pony.

But man, the defensive concerns are real. I suppose the biggest endorsement I can give his defense is that not only is his poor defense a result of athletic concerns, but he’s also a poor technique defender. That’s a weird compliment, but at least it can be improved upon.

Perhaps most alarming, to me, is that I even have some concern that his shot may not translate at a high level, or at least at the elite level he would need it to be at in order to be effective with his limited defense. This concern exists for two reasons. First, he could struggle to get open off the ball against NBA caliber defenders. The game against Indiana, where he shot 7-18 overall and 1-9 from three against NBA caliber quickness and length, is the perfect example. Second, he has a low, in-front-of-his-head release that could need some slight modification when he loses that split second of time he needs to get his shot off. Bigger, faster, longer defenders who are just a split second crisper in their rotations always have a chance to throw shooters off of their games, and Murray, without elite size for his position and a low release, could be even more susceptible than most.

Murray should always be an extremely capable spot-up shooter, but that on-the-move ability I spoke of, which is crucial to his viability as a high draft pick, is going to be more difficult at the next level. Still, the potential is there.

I value off-the-ball scorers more than most, and especially ones who can shoot coming off of screens and on the move, and the pressure that puts on the defense, so I’m willing to take a gamble. But that kind of shows how weak this portion of the draft is, because it would be a very reluctant endorsement.

Tier 5
9. Demetrius Jackson, junior, point guard, Notre Dame
35.9 minutes, 15.8 points, 3.5 rebounds, 4.7 assists, 1.2 steals, 2.2 turnovers, 45.1% FG%, 33.1% 3PT%, 81.3% FT%

I like Jackson. I have confidence in his outside shot, despite shooting just 33.1 percent from three-point range this season, the outlier in an otherwise solid college career from three-point range. He’s quick, can turn the corner coming off a pick, has the kind of pull-up game to keep defenders honest, and is a creative enough passer to make use of that. Despite his 6’1″ size, I think he has the requisite athleticism, long arms, and strength where to overcome that and have an effective NBA career.

10. Buddy Hield, senior, shooting guard, Oklahoma
35.4 minutes, 25.0 points, 5.7 rebounds, 2.0 assists, 1.1 steals, 3.1 turnovers per game, 50.1% FG%, 45.7% 3PT%, 88.0% FT%

Few prospects in this draft are as polarizing as Oklahoma’s Buddy Hield. For many who watched him take the nation by storm, he’s a star in the making. For those who heavily utilize statistical projection systems, he’s borderline undraftable. The truth is probably somewhere in-between.

While I share many of the concerns that those extremely low on Hield have — no real instinct or vision to create shots for his teammates, mediocre handles, undersized, lack of elite burst to turn the corner or athleticism around the rim, doesn’t get to the line much considering his usage — there are three reasons I’m willing to take a gamble he can develop into a capable role player.

First, I value off-the-ball, on-the-move scoring quite a bit. While Hield isn’t as good on the move as Jamal Murray, he can still ably utilize a screen and put pressure on a defense. Second, the improvement he’s shown over his four years at Oklahoma, where he was a complete non-prospect at the beginning, shows the kind of work ethic he has, something that has been corroborated by virtually everybody that has worked with Hield over the years. That’s important, especially in this draft, where you’re banking on somebody in this range improving more than the typical development curve suggests they should. Third, while he’s undersized for the two, he does have a 6’8.5″ wingspan and he’s a relatively willing defender. I think he can be capable at the next level when his offensive workload isn’t so insanely high.

Notable omissions:

Jaylen Brown: Incredible athlete, but I have little to no confidence in his ability to play the game of basketball. When he wasn’t getting to the free throw line, he wasn’t making an impact. Has the chance to improve, and could make this look silly if he progresses more the typical curve, but I just don’t have confidence.

Jakob Poeltl: I think he’s a top-10 prospect, just not for the Sixers. Big men who can’t space the floor and have to stay near the basket defensively just don’t fit this roster, and would be unlikely to get much opportunity to showcase their skills early in their career.

Henry Ellenson: Like his potential offensive skill set, especially next to Joel Embiid and/or Nerlens Noel, as he has the potential to space the floor, has some face-up skills, and can rebound. I just don’t see him guarding anyone in the NBA, and I don’t think his offensive skill level is that much of an outlier to overcome that and still be an impact player.

Skal Labissiere & Marquese Chriss: Their long-term defensive rebounding concerns, at center and power forward, scare me off from drafting them. Both could take a couple of years before really putting it together, too, and I’m just not sure the payoff is worth it, although Skal’s combination of shot blocking / face-up game, and Chriss’ quick-twitch athleticism, are both reasons somebody could take a gamble on them late in the lottery.
Guys I like, but not enough to put into top-10 (aka target at 24/26):

We’ll discuss these guys in more detail in the coming weeks, but real quickly:

DeAndre Bembry: Do-it-all wing whose defensive versatility should be a real plus in the NBA. If his jumper can improve more than the mean, he could be a real solid piece.

Isaia Cordinier: Elite athlete who can drive to the hoop and shoot from three. Only 19 years old and was playing in second division France, so he’s extremely untested, but lots of upside for this late in the draft.

Caris LeVert: Talent far exceeds his ability to stay on the court. Good buy-low candidate just to see if he can get some luck down the line.

Gary Payton II: Will fall in the draft because of his age (23), and not an elite playmaker (32.9 percent assist rate) or shooter (31.4 percent from three, 64.2 percent from the line), but any player who can put the kind of pressure on the point of attack Payton can has my attention.

Patrick McCaw: Developing shooter, great size, skills handling the ball after playing point guard before a late growth spurt, good athleticism and dribble penetration ability, defensive potential. Hasn’t put it all together yet, but I like him quite a bit as a guy who has a chance put it all together and become a good all-around wing.

[TheSundanceKid]

That's a really interesting take on the prospects, TP for sharing.

Luwawu that high up took me by surprise, as did Murray being so low. I haven't watched Murray this year but from all the talk I presumed he was a lock for the top-6. Valentine has had some love on these boards do I can understand rating him highly.

This guy seems to err on the side of proven ability rather than "untapped potential" which is probably similar to Ainge so this could be close to what the Celtics board looks like right now.

I am still keen on Brown although I completely understand the concerns. If he does slide to #9 or #10 I'd like to see us consolidate some picks to trade up for him.

I'm in agreement on Hield, I think March Madness made him a national darling and has inflated his stock way beyond where it should be. However I do think he'll be drafted higher than he is on this big board because of that hype. Someone like Sacramento or New Orleans will take him if he's still there. I just hope we don't take him at #3.

[PhoSita]

I think there's a good chance Murray comps favorably to Cj McCollum. Or a healthy Eric Gordon.  If that's the case, Bodner has him way too low.

His points about Bender are valid, but if Bender can't actually shoot that well except when he's wide open, if he can't finish inside except on the fast break, if he can't rebound his position or defend the post one on one... Three is way too high.

All of those things seem plausible with Bender.


I like Valentine, but I think the value there will be if he falls to the mid to late 1st.  He'll be a high character glue guy in the NBA.

Poeltl seems to me like the consolation prize for the Celts. If they can't get one of the top two or one of the flamethrower guards in the top 5, I'd be happy to come away with a solid interior defender, rebounder, and finisher.

[Eddie20]

His points about Bender are valid, but if Bender can't actually shoot that we'll except when he's wide open, if he can't finish inside except on the fast break, if he can't rebound his position or defend the post one on one... Three is way too high.

All of those things seem plausible with Bender.

He never said he couldn't shoot unless open. He described him ideally as a stretch 4, who can excel as a perimeter defender because of his mobility. In addition, as a stretch 4, and considering the way the league is trending, perimeter D (especially on pnr's) is far more important that post D. He also seems to think his floor is pretty high given his skillset and again the way the league is trending. That's pretty interesting and valid. His expected growth as a player (he is afterall the youngest player in the draft) can only add to his projected value. Eventually pairing him with a defensive minded 5 is a must though.

[Evantime34]

It's nice to read something that differs greatly from the consensus. It seems at this time of year a lot of the draft writers tend to normalize.

I like Luwawu and Valentine a lot... if they are still available with the Mavs pick.

Having Hield that far down is interesting. His biggest complaint seems to be that Hield needs to dominate the ball to score effectively but doesn't have the ability to get others involved as a pg. Even though Hield is a better scorer than Valentine, he likes Valentine better because he's a shooter and a distributor.

[CFAN38]

Great find, its nice to read a piece on the draft written by someone knowledgeable who isn't just sticking to the consensus mocks.

[PhoSita]

His points about Bender are valid, but if Bender can't actually shoot that we'll except when he's wide open, if he can't finish inside except on the fast break, if he can't rebound his position or defend the post one on one... Three is way too high.

All of those things seem plausible with Bender.

He never said he couldn't shoot unless open. He described him ideally as a stretch 4, who can excel as a perimeter defender because of his mobility. In addition, as a stretch 4, and considering the way the league is trending, perimeter D (especially on pnr's) is far more important that post D. He also seems to think his floor is pretty high given his skillset and again the way the league is trending. That's pretty interesting and valid. His expected growth as a player (he is afterall the youngest player in the draft) can only add to his projected value. Eventually pairing him with a defensive minded 5 is a must though.

I can see the argument for Benders ceiling, I just think Bodner understates the floor.

Could Bender be Jan Vesely with a better jumper? Isn't that just Bargnani 2.0?  I think I'd rather take that kind of risk later in the draft. Lots of Euro bigs to take chances on, eg Cornelie.

[Eddie20]

His points about Bender are valid, but if Bender can't actually shoot that we'll except when he's wide open, if he can't finish inside except on the fast break, if he can't rebound his position or defend the post one on one... Three is way too high.

All of those things seem plausible with Bender.

He never said he couldn't shoot unless open. He described him ideally as a stretch 4, who can excel as a perimeter defender because of his mobility. In addition, as a stretch 4, and considering the way the league is trending, perimeter D (especially on pnr's) is far more important that post D. He also seems to think his floor is pretty high given his skillset and again the way the league is trending. That's pretty interesting and valid. His expected growth as a player (he is afterall the youngest player in the draft) can only add to his projected value. Eventually pairing him with a defensive minded 5 is a must though.

I can see the argument for Benders ceiling, I just think Bodner understates the floor.

Could Bender be Jan Vesely with a better jumper? Isn't that just Bargnani 2.0?  I think I'd rather take that kind of risk later in the draft. Lots of Euro bigs to take chances on, eg Cornelie.

Right, but the difference is that his perimeter defense is actually one of his greatest strengths. Bargnani was always an awful defender. Now imagine a player that can shoot like him, but switch, hedge, and rotate quickly as a perimeter defender? Let's say a Barnani offensively, Jerebko defensively that's 7-1 and just 18. That's a very valuable player with a ton of upside as his body continues to mature.

[PhoSita]

What do we know about what he can do defensively, though?

What about his career so far demonstrates he will be able to defend the perimeter at the NBA level?


Look, I agree that having a seven footer with the ability to switch on pick and rolls and hit an open spot-up three is undeniably valuable.

I just don't think you need to use a top 5 pick on that sort of guy.

If Bender shows a lot of potential to be more than a 3-and-D big, then that's a different story.  If we're just talking about a 3-and-D guy with size, like I said, I'd take some shots in the late 1st / early 2nd.  There are lots of foreign prospects who look like they could play that Jonas Jerebko / Channing Frye role.



The way I see it, the Celts are really missing two basic things:

- A pure 18-20+ ppg scorer on the wing, ideally with good positional size

- A strong interior rebounder, finisher, and shot-changer/deterrer/blocker


If at all possible, I would like to see the BRK pick used on a guy with the potential to become one of those things.

[Eddie20]

What do we know about what he can do defensively, though?

What about his career so far demonstrates he will be able to defend the perimeter at the NBA level?

DX has some video highlighting examples of this at the 7:15 mark

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0Epg_sBZq4

[TheSundanceKid]

What do we know about what he can do defensively, though?

What about his career so far demonstrates he will be able to defend the perimeter at the NBA level?


Look, I agree that having a seven footer with the ability to switch on pick and rolls and hit an open spot-up three is undeniably valuable.

I just don't think you need to use a top 5 pick on that sort of guy.

If Bender shows a lot of potential to be more than a 3-and-D big, then that's a different story.  If we're just talking about a 3-and-D guy with size, like I said, I'd take some shots in the late 1st / early 2nd.  There are lots of foreign prospects who look like they could play that Jonas Jerebko / Channing Frye role.



The way I see it, the Celts are really missing two basic things:

- A pure 18-20+ ppg scorer on the wing, ideally with good positional size

- A strong interior rebounder, finisher, and shot-changer/deterrer/blocker


If at all possible, I would like to see the BRK pick used on a guy with the potential to become one of those things.

Outside of the top-2 you aren't getting a guy like that though. Hield is undersized and to me his transition is questionable, Murray is slow and apparently defensively inept which I was unaware of, Brown seems like as much of a gamble as Bender, Dunn is very redundant on our roster.

Like Eddie has said though Bender is 18 and is a 3 and D guy. We expect the other prospects to develop their skills or in some cases athleticism so why should we be less open to Bender doing the same? If he can impact defensively on switches and knock down some 3's in his first year (which I admit is not a given) then we can hope that in the years to come he can add muscle and be a more competitive rebounder and perhaps form some small amount of post game.

[CoachBo]

Bender would be a GREAT fit on the Sixers.

BWHAHAHAHAHA.

[PhoSita]

I think Murray has the potential to be a CJ McCollum / Eric Gordon type shooting guard.  Worst case he's more like a Jerryd Bayless / Randy Foye type, which is not ideal, but still a useful player.

Those guys have defensive issues too, but when healthy and well-utilized have been valuable scorers who space the floor and provide secondary playmaking.

I'm not sure if Hield has the same potential, but I think he could at least be something like a Redick / Korver type off-ball scorer, with shades of J.R. Smith.  I dunno if that's worth a top 5 pick, but to me it's better than gambling on a spindly 3-and-D Euro prospect with no track record against decent competition.

And if all else fails, you have Poeltl, who we know can do some key, basic things like grab rebounds and finish inside.  Poeltl has a lower ceiling than Bender, but looks to have a much higher floor as an Andrew Bogut style big who provides solid defense, grabs boards, and scores in crafty ways near the basket.

The biggest thing for me with the BRK pick is I want to get an NBA player who has honest-to-goodness high level skills that the Celts can use.

Bender, or a guy like Wade Baldwin or Jaylen Brown, might have a higher ceiling. But I also think there's a good chance one or more of those guys is not in the NBA in 5-6 years. 

Murray, Hield, Poeltl ... I feel confident any of them could help the Celts right away, and perhaps blossom into key starters, though likely not stars.

[TheSundanceKid]

Nice points Pho, I appreciate where you're coming from. Personally I'm willing to gamble on that higher ceiling with Bender because his strengths fit well with Brad Stevens basketball.

I've probably mentioned it whenever Bender comes up but the workouts will be so important for him. That's the point where he'll either lock into the 3 spot or slide quite a way

[Eddie20]

Nice points Pho, I appreciate where you're coming from. Personally I'm willing to gamble on that higher ceiling with Bender because his strengths fit well with Brad Stevens basketball.

I've probably mentioned it whenever Bender comes up but the workouts will be so important for him. That's the point where he'll either lock into the 3 spot or slide quite a way

I'm with you. I don't mind Murray at all, in fact, I have him 4th overall. However, the upside Bender brings is what has him firmly entrenched as #3 in my mind.


Bodner had a few more thoughts on him via twitter:

Q- How much of a concern is the quality of competition he's facing?

A- @DerekBodnerNBA 
Very little concern. how much of a concern is the quality of competition in the SEC? People underrate the foreign leagues. Israeli league isn't the best, but he's playing against 28-30 y/o's. keep in mind, at this point something like a third of the league, maybe even more, is former american college players.




Q- How would you compare them athletically? Kristaps looks like a freak athlete for his size with insane measurables

A- @DerekBodnerNBA 
Kristaps longer and better vertically, but I think Bender moves his feet better laterally.


On thing with Bender that's I think overlooked: It's not just his quickness that makes him unique defensively, but his technique. Bender gets in a great stance, closes out under control, and rotates very well. Heady and disciplined defender for age.