Author Topic: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick  (Read 8479 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #30 on: July 05, 2016, 02:52:48 PM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
I absolutely think Ainge thought he was going for the best available player (or the player with the potential to best player) at that spot.

Whether or not it works out that way remains to be seen.  I'm always amazed at arm chair scouts who think they know beyond a shadow of a doubt who the best players are before they've even played an NBA game.

It generally takes at least a full two seasons (sometimes longer) before we can make any legitimate determinations about young players.
DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #31 on: July 05, 2016, 03:26:09 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862

 My point is why not stash later in the second round. At #16 you should draft BPA which we did not IMO.

 Add to that we could really use a PF next to Horford and three very good ones were on the board. Take one of Ellenson, Johnson, Skal, The first two are tremendous rebounders, exactly what we need.

What is your criteria by which you assert that he wasn't the BPA?

I mean, seriously.  Just because a bunch of mock drafts said that "Player A" should be ranked 10 picks before "Player B" clearly doesn't mean anything.   The various NBA GMs pretty clearly didn't give a hoot what all the mock drafts were saying before this draft.

Pretty much the last 51 of 60 picks in this draft were completely different than any mock draft predicted.   That is, most of the draft.

The GMs clearly take into account different information than all us folk looking at the process from the outside.  They have much more in-depth scouting reports, hours upon hours of video, and they get first hand private workouts with which to evaluate players with.

It should be no surprise that their player rankings are extremely different from those made by lesser-informed 'mock drafts'.

For all we know, based on the criteria that Ainge and his peers use, Yabusele was, indeed, the BPA at that pick.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #32 on: July 05, 2016, 03:39:29 PM »

Offline dark_lord

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8808
  • Tommy Points: 1126
ainge arguably didn't take the BPA at #3, why would #16 be any different ;)

Brown outplayed Simmons, the first pick in the draft yesterday.

so using your logic....

OMG, we got the best player in the draft!  woohoo!!!  ;)

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #33 on: July 05, 2016, 03:45:43 PM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8677
  • Tommy Points: 1138
It'd be shocking if you could find any other team in the league who considered that guy the BPA at 16.

Even one.


 Although this may be a bit of an exaggeration, it's not by much. Not many teams would have taken the French Fry at #16.

 Brown was predicted by many at #3
 Heck I made a thread about Zizic at #23
 Danny did great with Jackson and Bentil in round 2

 And Danny has to have his wierdo where did that come from pick almost every year.

 Examples of that are Rozier and Fab Melo. Rozier is looking good, Melo was the worst. Time will tell, but I don't know man.

 I love Brice Johnson and will be mad if he's the real deal in the NBA.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #34 on: July 05, 2016, 05:32:51 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19003
  • Tommy Points: 1833
It'd be shocking if you could find any other team in the league who considered that guy the BPA at 16.

Even one.


 Although this may be a bit of an exaggeration, it's not by much. Not many teams would have taken the French Fry at #16.

 Brown was predicted by many at #3
 Heck I made a thread about Zizic at #23
 Danny did great with Jackson and Bentil in round 2

 And Danny has to have his wierdo where did that come from pick almost every year.

 Examples of that are Rozier and Fab Melo. Rozier is looking good, Melo was the worst. Time will tell, but I don't know man.

 I love Brice Johnson and will be mad if he's the real deal in the NBA.

Sorry but Fab Melo wasn't weirdo pick. He was picked in the projected range. In fact, I recall some that had him in the 17-20 range.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #35 on: July 05, 2016, 05:38:33 PM »

Offline PickNRoll

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1691
  • Tommy Points: 199
I guarantee Danny took the guy who he thought was BPA.  Whether he was or not remains to be seen.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #36 on: July 05, 2016, 06:08:15 PM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8677
  • Tommy Points: 1138
It'd be shocking if you could find any other team in the league who considered that guy the BPA at 16.

Even one.


 Although this may be a bit of an exaggeration, it's not by much. Not many teams would have taken the French Fry at #16.

 Brown was predicted by many at #3
 Heck I made a thread about Zizic at #23
 Danny did great with Jackson and Bentil in round 2

 And Danny has to have his wierdo where did that come from pick almost every year.

 Examples of that are Rozier and Fab Melo. Rozier is looking good, Melo was the worst. Time will tell, but I don't know man.

 I love Brice Johnson and will be mad if he's the real deal in the NBA.

Sorry but Fab Melo wasn't weirdo pick. He was picked in the projected range. In fact, I recall some that had him in the 17-20 range.



 Fab Melo was horrible. If they projected him that High those scouts should be fired. He had Defensive potential and that's it. Just a horrible basketball player, and he was as dumb as a rock.

 Just the lack of a brain factor he should have passed. Add to that Draymond Green is everything you want in a player, and I loved him in college just like Brice Johnson. idk what scouts are thinking on these players.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #37 on: July 05, 2016, 06:08:55 PM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8677
  • Tommy Points: 1138
I guarantee Danny took the guy who he thought was BPA.  Whether he was or not remains to be seen.



 I think your wrong.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #38 on: July 05, 2016, 06:42:03 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19003
  • Tommy Points: 1833
It'd be shocking if you could find any other team in the league who considered that guy the BPA at 16.

Even one.


 Although this may be a bit of an exaggeration, it's not by much. Not many teams would have taken the French Fry at #16.

 Brown was predicted by many at #3
 Heck I made a thread about Zizic at #23
 Danny did great with Jackson and Bentil in round 2

 And Danny has to have his wierdo where did that come from pick almost every year.

 Examples of that are Rozier and Fab Melo. Rozier is looking good, Melo was the worst. Time will tell, but I don't know man.

 I love Brice Johnson and will be mad if he's the real deal in the NBA.

Sorry but Fab Melo wasn't weirdo pick. He was picked in the projected range. In fact, I recall some that had him in the 17-20 range.



 Fab Melo was horrible. If they projected him that High those scouts should be fired. He had Defensive potential and that's it. Just a horrible basketball player, and he was as dumb as a rock.

 Just the lack of a brain factor he should have passed. Add to that Draymond Green is everything you want in a player, and I loved him in college just like Brice Johnson. idk what scouts are thinking on these players.

Just saying it wasn't a weirdo where did that come from pick, that's all.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #39 on: July 05, 2016, 06:52:54 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
It'd be shocking if you could find any other team in the league who considered that guy the BPA at 16.

Even one.


 Although this may be a bit of an exaggeration, it's not by much. Not many teams would have taken the French Fry at #16.

 Brown was predicted by many at #3
 Heck I made a thread about Zizic at #23
 Danny did great with Jackson and Bentil in round 2

 And Danny has to have his wierdo where did that come from pick almost every year.

 Examples of that are Rozier and Fab Melo. Rozier is looking good, Melo was the worst. Time will tell, but I don't know man.

 I love Brice Johnson and will be mad if he's the real deal in the NBA.

Sorry but Fab Melo wasn't weirdo pick. He was picked in the projected range. In fact, I recall some that had him in the 17-20 range.



 Fab Melo was horrible. If they projected him that High those scouts should be fired. He had Defensive potential and that's it. Just a horrible basketball player, and he was as dumb as a rock.

 Just the lack of a brain factor he should have passed. Add to that Draymond Green is everything you want in a player, and I loved him in college just like Brice Johnson. idk what scouts are thinking on these players.

Ainge made a mistake going for a low upside guy he hoped would immediately step in and provide rim protection.  He seems to have avoided going for players who fit that description, to the consternation of fans who want him to him to take players who project as solid rotation bigs with little star potential.
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #40 on: July 05, 2016, 07:08:47 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12765
  • Tommy Points: 1546
It'd be shocking if you could find any other team in the league who considered that guy the BPA at 16.

Even one.

I'd be surprised if he wasn't on multiple teams had him in that range.

There are good players in Europe, too, you know.

Chad Ford tweeted that he thought Yabusele would go between 20 and 35.  I think it is correct for the Celtics to draft the long-term BPA regardless of position and not the player most likely to step in and make an immediate contribution off the bench.

Exactly, this was a very shrewd gamble by Ainge on a player with a ton of future upside.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #41 on: July 05, 2016, 08:01:58 PM »

Offline dreamgreen

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3558
  • Tommy Points: 182
It's a fair a question, one that I have asked myself a few times. I'll give Danny the benefit of the doubt right now but we will revisit this in the future.

Re: Did we take BPA at #16, or were we forced to take a Stash Pick
« Reply #42 on: July 05, 2016, 08:05:38 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
Ainge reached to take a 20 year old overseas that you can sort of see maybe having a high ceiling if he drastically improves.

I think he's a 2nd round caliber prospect.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain