If Boston didn't take Brown where do you think he would have gone?

[PhoSita]

Consensus among draft sites =/= Consensus among NBA team talent evaluators


Or do we need to go through every instance in this draft where the draftnik sites got it very wrong?

Skal, just to give one example, was listed as a lottery pick all the way up to the day of the draft.  Deyonta Davis was regularly slotted in the 10-15 range.

Where'd they get selected?

Everyone understands that, but they are much more connected then you and I, especially certain guys like Ford, Woj, etc.

Most assuredly, but I think it's clear that even with their connections, they are still working with an incomplete picture, and teams are often feeding them misinformation for their own purposes.

This year's draft seemed an especially bad one for the draftnik sites.  The real draft was all over the place compared to the mocks.

To act as if the draftnik mocks, or Chad Ford's tiers, are more indicative of what NBA teams thought of the players' value on draft night than the draft itself, is just plain silly.

But that is the point Boston took Brown at 3, what if Boston traded the pick to Philly who took Dunn, then where does Brown go?  It only takes one team to like someone, the question is, did other teams rate Brown that highly?  I don't think that is the case.  I think Brown falls out of the top 5 if Boston didn't take him, and he easily could have fallen all the way to 8 where Boston might have had the pieces to move up and take him there.

I'm pretty confident that one of Phoenix, Minnesota, or Denver would have taken Brown if the Celts hadn't taken him and Dunn were off the board.

I can't say for sure whether the Celts valued Brown a lot more highly than other teams, but I tend to think not.

For me to think that, I'd have to believe there were other factors at play that didn't have to do with a guy's strengths and weaknesses.

Example -- with Terry Rozier, I felt that Danny reached on him (i.e. took him 5-10 spots higher than he probably would have gone otherwise) because Danny has certain types of prospects he is comfortable projecting to the NBA -- of which Terry is an example -- and last year's draft was pretty soft and deep in the middle.

The other example that comes to mind is Yabusele.  There, again, I think Danny went for one of his "types," and on top of that, I think the Celts were keen to get draft-and-stash candidates with their 2nd and 3rd first round picks.  My guess is that Yabu was a bit of a reach.

Of course, in neither of those instances do I know for certain that they were "reaches."  I can only speculate.  I don't think mock drafts can do much to clarify the situation beyond a rough idea of where prospects were expected to go in the draft by people not in a position to actually make the final decisions.


With Brown, I think the pros and cons are fairly obvious, and I don't think it would take a certain kind of GM to want to draft him in the top 10.  It comes down to whether the red flags in his game are big enough to make you overly pessimistic about his ability to become an above average starting caliber player at the NBA level. 

Since the Celts took a chance on him with the 3rd pick in the draft, leaving on the board a more polished player who probably would have been a more valuable trade chip during the off-season, I tend to assume that from an NBA evaluator's perspective, those red flags weren't too ominous.

[Moranis]

Consensus among draft sites =/= Consensus among NBA team talent evaluators


Or do we need to go through every instance in this draft where the draftnik sites got it very wrong?

Skal, just to give one example, was listed as a lottery pick all the way up to the day of the draft.  Deyonta Davis was regularly slotted in the 10-15 range.

Where'd they get selected?

Everyone understands that, but they are much more connected then you and I, especially certain guys like Ford, Woj, etc.

Most assuredly, but I think it's clear that even with their connections, they are still working with an incomplete picture, and teams are often feeding them misinformation for their own purposes.

This year's draft seemed an especially bad one for the draftnik sites.  The real draft was all over the place compared to the mocks.

To act as if the draftnik mocks, or Chad Ford's tiers, are more indicative of what NBA teams thought of the players' value on draft night than the draft itself, is just plain silly.

But that is the point Boston took Brown at 3, what if Boston traded the pick to Philly who took Dunn, then where does Brown go?  It only takes one team to like someone, the question is, did other teams rate Brown that highly?  I don't think that is the case.  I think Brown falls out of the top 5 if Boston didn't take him, and he easily could have fallen all the way to 8 where Boston might have had the pieces to move up and take him there.

I'm pretty confident that one of Phoenix, Minnesota, or Denver would have taken Brown if the Celts hadn't taken him and Dunn were off the board.

I can't say for sure whether the Celts valued Brown a lot more highly than other teams, but I tend to think not.

For me to think that, I'd have to believe there were other factors at play that didn't have to do with a guy's strengths and weaknesses.

Example -- with Terry Rozier, I felt that Danny reached on him (i.e. took him 5-10 spots higher than he probably would have gone otherwise) because Danny has certain types of prospects he is comfortable projecting to the NBA -- of which Terry is an example -- and last year's draft was pretty soft and deep in the middle.

The other example that comes to mind is Yabusele.  There, again, I think Danny went for one of his "types," and on top of that, I think the Celts were keen to get draft-and-stash candidates with their 2nd and 3rd first round picks.  My guess is that Yabu was a bit of a reach.

Of course, in neither of those instances do I know for certain that they were "reaches."  I can only speculate.  I don't think mock drafts can do much to clarify the situation beyond a rough idea of where prospects were expected to go in the draft by people not in a position to actually make the final decisions.


With Brown, I think the pros and cons are fairly obvious, and I don't think it would take a certain kind of GM to want to draft him in the top 10.  It comes down to whether the red flags in his game are big enough to make you overly pessimistic about his ability to become an above average starting caliber player at the NBA level. 

Since the Celts took a chance on him with the 3rd pick in the draft, leaving on the board a more polished player who probably would have been a more valuable trade chip during the off-season, I tend to assume that from an NBA evaluator's perspective, those red flags weren't too ominous.

I don't think he even worked out for Minnesota.  Was supposed to, but cancelled to work out for Boston again.  Can't see Minnesota taking a guy at 5 that didn't even work out for them. 

[PhoSita]

Aren't there plenty of instances of guys who were drafted by a team even though they didn't work out for that team?

[celticsclay]

Aren't there plenty of instances of guys who were drafted by a team even though they didn't work out for that team?

yes. That is quite common. Although he later changed his mind, Simmons initially wasn't going to work out for the 76ers. (http://www.csnphilly.com/philadelphia-76ers/its-not-red-flag-ben-simmons-wont-work-out-sixers)

 I am pretty sure they still would have taken him even if he hadn't.

 At this point this thread has just become 8 pages of people arguing over something that nobody really has anyway of knowing short of the gm's with picks in the 4-8 range all coming out and saying they either loved or hated brown and would have taken them. It seems we have a couple of the usual suspects trying really hard to argue that Brown would not have been picked as high by some other teams either for the sake of just being negative about a player that is on our team or for other reasons unknown to me.

Since this can't really ever be resolved what is the point to try and argue he would have been picked 4th or 9th? He is on the Celtics, has long been a highly rated Recruit and left to head to the NBA at the age of 19. Why can't we just be happy we have him?

[celticsclay]

Suns would have drafted Jaylen 4th.

The Suns with PJ Tucker and TJ Warren and no power forward would have selected Brown over Bender.  I find that hard to believe.

There is a good chance the Suns could have taken him 4th for sure. Say we took Bender instead. They obviously would not need Dunn with Bledsoe and Knight on the roster (and I have a really hard time believing they want to revisit the "all the guards theory" that saw them lose IT for peanuts. PJ Tucker is a bench player and I think Warren is probably best served as a scorer off the bench as well. I doubt if they liked Brown they are not taking him because they have those two guys on the roster. The larger point is that we honestly have zero way of knowing what they would do and it is probably 50 50 he would go 4th if we took bender.

[Moranis]

Suns would have drafted Jaylen 4th.

The Suns with PJ Tucker and TJ Warren and no power forward would have selected Brown over Bender.  I find that hard to believe.

There is a good chance the Suns could have taken him 4th for sure. Say we took Bender instead. They obviously would not need Dunn with Bledsoe and Knight on the roster (and I have a really hard time believing they want to revisit the "all the guards theory" that saw them lose IT for peanuts. PJ Tucker is a bench player and I think Warren is probably best served as a scorer off the bench as well. I doubt if they liked Brown they are not taking him because they have those two guys on the roster. The larger point is that we honestly have zero way of knowing what they would do and it is probably 50 50 he would go 4th if we took bender.

what the hell does this post have to do with mine?  I mean seriously, are you just stalking me and commenting just to comment now. 

And I've already said numerous times in this thread that had #3 been Bender, there is a good chance Phoenix would have taken Brown at 4 (with Chriss the other possibility), but the entire purpose of this thread was basically #3 is Dunn, where does Brown go with the idea that it might have been possible for Boston to trade with Philly and still end up with Brown by using 16 and the Philly assets to move back up to 8 in a trade with Sacramento.  Philly was not trying to acquire 3 to taken Bender or Brown, they were trying to acquire 3 to take a guard, and almost certainly Dunn.

[celticsclay]

Suns would have drafted Jaylen 4th.

The Suns with PJ Tucker and TJ Warren and no power forward would have selected Brown over Bender.  I find that hard to believe.

There is a good chance the Suns could have taken him 4th for sure. Say we took Bender instead. They obviously would not need Dunn with Bledsoe and Knight on the roster (and I have a really hard time believing they want to revisit the "all the guards theory" that saw them lose IT for peanuts. PJ Tucker is a bench player and I think Warren is probably best served as a scorer off the bench as well. I doubt if they liked Brown they are not taking him because they have those two guys on the roster. The larger point is that we honestly have zero way of knowing what they would do and it is probably 50 50 he would go 4th if we took bender.

what the hell does this post have to do with mine?  I mean seriously, are you just stalking me and commenting just to comment now. 

And I've already said numerous times in this thread that had #3 been Bender, there is a good chance Phoenix would have taken Brown at 4 (with Chriss the other possibility), but the entire purpose of this thread was basically #3 is Dunn, where does Brown go with the idea that it might have been possible for Boston to trade with Philly and still end up with Brown by using 16 and the Philly assets to move back up to 8 in a trade with Sacramento.  Philly was not trying to acquire 3 to taken Bender or Brown, they were trying to acquire 3 to take a guard, and almost certainly Dunn.

whoa stalking you? lol. Thanks for the laugh pal.

It sounds like you actually agree with my point so not sure what are you all up in arms about (or how agreeing with someone constitutes stalking) . If we took bender brown may have gone 4th.

I guess if we took dunn the point is the draft could have gone differently based on team need with him falling some? what is the point of the whole thread than? That seems like a pretty unremarkable premises that players can go in different positions based on team needs?

[PhoSita]

 At this point this thread has just become 8 pages of people arguing over something that nobody really has anyway of knowing

Hooray for August / September, the NBA

[celticsclay]

 At this point this thread has just become 8 pages of people arguing over something that nobody really has anyway of knowing

Hooray for August / September, the NBA

Phosita you really got your fastball getting over the plate these days. Well played.

[crimson_stallion]

I'm thinking Phoenix would still take Bender at #4 regardless, firstly because they needed a PF and secondly because they seem to have been obsessed with Bender from day one.

Next we have Minnesota at #5.

They are stacked with young talent from the 1-4 positions, and there were no high-upside bigs left on the board by this time, so the only logical choice for them would be to choose based on pure upside. 

With Ingram, Bender and Simmons off the board, the highest upside guy still remaining were CLEARLY Dunn and Brown - probably in that order.

Boston took Brown at #3, so the Wolves took Dunn.  I think they were happy about that because I honestly think Dunn was Minny's #1 choice anyway. 

Now think about it - Dunn is a guard who is extremely athletic, very physically strong, can defend multiple positions, can play on both ends of the court, rebounds well, and is a high motor / work ethic guy.   Brown is basically a younger, bigger, rawer, SF version of Dunn.

So it makes a lot of sense that the Wolves probably have Brown as their second choice if Dunn were off the board, since they are somewhat similar types of players (albeit Dunn is a much more refined version). 

Hence I seriously doubt Brown would have made it past #5 regardless.

[LarBrd33]

Lets say Boston took Dunn at #3 and traded him to Philly...

I'm thinking Phoenix still would still take Bender at #4, firstly because they needed size and secondly because they seem to have been obsessed with Bender from day one.

From here it's really a tough call. 

If you are Minnesota and you're selecting at #5, the top prospects available are Brown, Hield, Murray and Chriss.

You already have Lavine (a solid shooter and combo-guard with good size) so Dunn and Hield would be kinda redundant.  You already have Rubio so no need to chase a PG (though there were none anyway).  You already have Wiggins and KAT so no need to chase a SF or PF, specifically.  They could use a center, but you aren't going to reach on a Poltl/Maker/Sabonis THIS high in the draft.  So it makes zero sense really for them to choose based on positional need.

That means if you are Minnesota, you have to select based on pure upside and fit. 

Now the Wolves are a very athletic team, so I imagine they're going to want to play uptempo.  They also don't seem to care much about shooting based on recent draft history (Rubio, Wiggins, their eventual pick of Kris Dunn).  So put all of this together and it's safe to assume they would have had minimal interest in Hield or Murray.

That means it probably would have come down to Chriss or Brown.  With all of the question marks on Chriss (motor, attitude, etc) I find it very hard to believe they'd have taken him this high.

So I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if Boston didn't take Brown at #3, he'd probably have gone to the Timberwolves at #5.  I'm guessing they'd have shifted Wiggins to the SG spot, put Brown at the SF spot, and moved forward with a very nice (and rediculously athletic) young core of Rubio/Wiggins/Brown/Towns. 

If he didn't go at #5 then I think the Hornets would have taken Hield (they seemed high on him and desperately wanted shooting), so he'd likely have gone at #7 to Denver.  He has far higher upside then Murray does, so I can't imagine Denver would have taken Murray over Brown. 

But that's all a moot point because I very much doubt he'd have gone past #5. 

The way I see it, there were really only three guys who had enough percieved upside to justify consideration at the #3 spot and they were Dunn, Brown and Bender.  It was not likely any one of those three guys was falling out of the top 5.

Perhaps, but it doesn't really sound like Jaylen was high on the Wolves draft board.  They didn't work him out.  Had Dunn not been available, it really sounds like they would have went with one of the shooters (Murray or Hield).  Scoff at the draftniks, but that's who most of them had Minny taking.

[crimson_stallion]

Lets say Boston took Dunn at #3 and traded him to Philly...

I'm thinking Phoenix still would still take Bender at #4, firstly because they needed size and secondly because they seem to have been obsessed with Bender from day one.

From here it's really a tough call. 

If you are Minnesota and you're selecting at #5, the top prospects available are Brown, Hield, Murray and Chriss.

You already have Lavine (a solid shooter and combo-guard with good size) so Dunn and Hield would be kinda redundant.  You already have Rubio so no need to chase a PG (though there were none anyway).  You already have Wiggins and KAT so no need to chase a SF or PF, specifically.  They could use a center, but you aren't going to reach on a Poltl/Maker/Sabonis THIS high in the draft.  So it makes zero sense really for them to choose based on positional need.

That means if you are Minnesota, you have to select based on pure upside and fit. 

Now the Wolves are a very athletic team, so I imagine they're going to want to play uptempo.  They also don't seem to care much about shooting based on recent draft history (Rubio, Wiggins, their eventual pick of Kris Dunn).  So put all of this together and it's safe to assume they would have had minimal interest in Hield or Murray.

That means it probably would have come down to Chriss or Brown.  With all of the question marks on Chriss (motor, attitude, etc) I find it very hard to believe they'd have taken him this high.

So I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if Boston didn't take Brown at #3, he'd probably have gone to the Timberwolves at #5.  I'm guessing they'd have shifted Wiggins to the SG spot, put Brown at the SF spot, and moved forward with a very nice (and rediculously athletic) young core of Rubio/Wiggins/Brown/Towns. 

If he didn't go at #5 then I think the Hornets would have taken Hield (they seemed high on him and desperately wanted shooting), so he'd likely have gone at #7 to Denver.  He has far higher upside then Murray does, so I can't imagine Denver would have taken Murray over Brown. 

But that's all a moot point because I very much doubt he'd have gone past #5. 

The way I see it, there were really only three guys who had enough percieved upside to justify consideration at the #3 spot and they were Dunn, Brown and Bender.  It was not likely any one of those three guys was falling out of the top 5.

Perhaps, but it doesn't really sound like Jaylen was high on the Wolves draft board.  They didn't work him out.  Had Dunn not been available, it really sounds like they would have went with one of the shooters (Murray or Hield).  Scoff at the draftniks, but that's who most of them had Minny taking.

Don't really care what the scouts predict, to be honest.

The Wolves seemingly wanted Dunn above anybody not named Ingram/Simmons, despite the fact that they already have a quality young PG in Rubio, who becomes completely redundant with the addition of Dunn.  If they wanted to add shooting (with Hield/Murray) then they easily could have done so, but they didn't, so it doesn't seem to me like shooting was very high on their agenda.

Minnesota have a core of guys now who are very young, and rediculously athletic (Rubio, Lavine, Wiggins, Towns).   It makes sense for them to push for an uptempo run-and-gun style of offense, and the two guys they had available who best fit that style of play would be Dunn and Brown.

[Moranis]

Lets say Boston took Dunn at #3 and traded him to Philly...

I'm thinking Phoenix still would still take Bender at #4, firstly because they needed size and secondly because they seem to have been obsessed with Bender from day one.

From here it's really a tough call. 

If you are Minnesota and you're selecting at #5, the top prospects available are Brown, Hield, Murray and Chriss.

You already have Lavine (a solid shooter and combo-guard with good size) so Dunn and Hield would be kinda redundant.  You already have Rubio so no need to chase a PG (though there were none anyway).  You already have Wiggins and KAT so no need to chase a SF or PF, specifically.  They could use a center, but you aren't going to reach on a Poltl/Maker/Sabonis THIS high in the draft.  So it makes zero sense really for them to choose based on positional need.

That means if you are Minnesota, you have to select based on pure upside and fit. 

Now the Wolves are a very athletic team, so I imagine they're going to want to play uptempo.  They also don't seem to care much about shooting based on recent draft history (Rubio, Wiggins, their eventual pick of Kris Dunn).  So put all of this together and it's safe to assume they would have had minimal interest in Hield or Murray.

That means it probably would have come down to Chriss or Brown.  With all of the question marks on Chriss (motor, attitude, etc) I find it very hard to believe they'd have taken him this high.

So I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if Boston didn't take Brown at #3, he'd probably have gone to the Timberwolves at #5.  I'm guessing they'd have shifted Wiggins to the SG spot, put Brown at the SF spot, and moved forward with a very nice (and rediculously athletic) young core of Rubio/Wiggins/Brown/Towns. 

If he didn't go at #5 then I think the Hornets would have taken Hield (they seemed high on him and desperately wanted shooting), so he'd likely have gone at #7 to Denver.  He has far higher upside then Murray does, so I can't imagine Denver would have taken Murray over Brown. 

But that's all a moot point because I very much doubt he'd have gone past #5. 

The way I see it, there were really only three guys who had enough percieved upside to justify consideration at the #3 spot and they were Dunn, Brown and Bender.  It was not likely any one of those three guys was falling out of the top 5.

Perhaps, but it doesn't really sound like Jaylen was high on the Wolves draft board.  They didn't work him out.  Had Dunn not been available, it really sounds like they would have went with one of the shooters (Murray or Hield).  Scoff at the draftniks, but that's who most of them had Minny taking.

Don't really care what the scouts predict, to be honest.

The Wolves seemingly wanted Dunn above anybody not named Ingram/Simmons, despite the fact that they already have a quality young PG in Rubio, who becomes completely redundant with the addition of Dunn.  If they wanted to add shooting (with Hield/Murray) then they easily could have done so, but they didn't, so it doesn't seem to me like shooting was very high on their agenda.

Minnesota have a core of guys now who are very young, and rediculously athletic (Rubio, Lavine, Wiggins, Towns).   It makes sense for them to push for an uptempo run-and-gun style of offense, and the two guys they had available who best fit that style of play would be Dunn and Brown.

Murray and Hield also fit that description, especially Murray.  Minnesota really needed a strong shooter as none of their smalls are shooters.  It is a big flaw on their team.  There have also been a lot of rumors involving Rubio, which seems to indicate he isn't in their long term plans. 

Minnesota didn't work Brown out, I find it hard to believe they would use the 5th pick on a guy that didn't work out for them.  I get that it occasionally happens, I just don't think Minnesota goes that way with the team they have. 

[TheSundanceKid]

OK so lets break this down.

3. Dunn (this is the premise of the thread)
4. Either Bender or Brown (I think it would have been close but for the sake of this let's say they take Bender)
5. Murray/Hield/Brown (They wanted a pg for the future so Murray makes the most sense, could have gone for any)
6. Hield/Brown (I think they had Hield pegged the whole way, fits in with the development of Davis nicely)
7. Brown/Chriss (At this point is there really any doubt that Brown is picked? Chriss duplicates what they already have and I really don't think people viewed him in the same bracket as Brown

I've done this as a worst case for Brown. He could easily have gone 4,5,6. If you were trading up to 8 you were trading for Chriss or below. 3-7 in this draft were in their own tier above the others. If Chriss had been in that tier then I really don't think Sacramento trade down, particularly as they selected big men anyway.

So for the premise of this thread, no we would not have been able to grab Brown at 8

[Moranis]

OK so lets break this down.

3. Dunn (this is the premise of the thread)
4. Either Bender or Brown (I think it would have been close but for the sake of this let's say they take Bender)
5. Murray/Hield/Brown (They wanted a pg for the future so Murray makes the most sense, could have gone for any)
6. Hield/Brown (I think they had Hield pegged the whole way, fits in with the development of Davis nicely)
7. Brown/Chriss (At this point is there really any doubt that Brown is picked? Chriss duplicates what they already have and I really don't think people viewed him in the same bracket as Brown

I've done this as a worst case for Brown. He could easily have gone 4,5,6. If you were trading up to 8 you were trading for Chriss or below. 3-7 in this draft were in their own tier above the others. If Chriss had been in that tier then I really don't think Sacramento trade down, particularly as they selected big men anyway.

So for the premise of this thread, no we would not have been able to grab Brown at 8

Nurkic and Jokic are both really centers.  They took Hernangomez who is a PF/C at 15.  They have Gallinari and Chandler already at the SF spot.  I think there is a very good chance they would have taken Chriss at 7 if all the top tier guards were off the board.  They certainly could have taken Brown (which is what I've said in this thread), but I wouldn't just write Chriss off as no possibility.  I mean heck they have Mudiay and took Murray anyway.  They were just going for value and maybe they had Chriss ahead of Brown on their board.