C's pick Aaron Nesmith #14 overall

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
4,810
I'm sure we're way overanalyzing at this point. He's played an absurdly small number of minutes. He hasn't looked that great, which may mean something or absolutely nothing. I agree with DeJesus that Nesmith's biggest problem, in regard to how he's viewed, is that Danny also drafted Pritchard, who looks like the steal of the draft, and Nesmith looks bad by comparison.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,088
You guys keep slaying that straw man that he’s a bust. Of course nobody knows. Posters are going out of their way to say that they’re not ready to call just but that the early returns aren’t positive. That seems like a pretty non controversial assessment of what he’s done. You have to slice the analysis down to individual plays right now to find some positivity. That’s OK but it’s close to as poor a start as you can imagine for him. You have to hope he stays confident and works hard and can put it all behind him. As stated earlier, he’s probably going to get the Tacko treatment aster people come back so hopefully he can work in practice and find the pace of the NBA game
Seriously. There isn’t a single person calling him a bust unless I missed it. People are simply analyzing the data that we have, which is admittedly minimal or non-existent. That’s all we can do as fans right now. The book on his career is not even out of the prologue but if people can’t comment on what they see, what is the point of these threads?
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
You guys keep slaying that straw man that he’s a bust. Of course nobody knows. Posters are going out of their way to say that they’re not ready to call just but that the early returns aren’t positive. That seems like a pretty non controversial assessment of what he’s done. You have to slice the analysis down to individual plays right now to find some positivity. That’s OK but it’s close to as poor a start as you can imagine for him. You have to hope he stays confident and works hard and can put it all behind him. As stated earlier, he’s probably going to get the Tacko treatment aster people come back so hopefully he can work in practice and find the pace of the NBA game
Early returns are poor but people clearly feel the need to point it out. You are correct nobody is calling him a bust but what are we doing here, exactly?

Aaron Nesmith has played in exactly four NBA games, with minutes that total just over one full game. He has not looked good in that time. These are facts. Where can the discussion go from there except to say that there are plenty of good NBA players who have struggled out of the gates and its a wait and see.

If people are going to point out that Nesmith is struggling four games into his professional career, people should also expect that others are going to focus on the four games aspect rather than the struggles.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
Seriously. There isn’t a single person calling him a bust unless I missed it. People are simply analyzing the data that we have, which is admittedly minimal or non-existent. That’s all we can do as fans right now. The book on his career is not even out of the prologue but if people can’t comment on what they see, what is the point of these threads?
People can post whatever they want. Its unreasonable to expect agreement.

That said, Aaron Nesmith has not looked good in 57 NBA minutes. We can disagree on what that means.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,088
People can post whatever they want. Its unreasonable to expect agreement.

That said, Aaron Nesmith has not looked good in 57 NBA minutes. We can disagree on what that means.
Yes, we can, preferably without the use of straw man arguments. And I don’t think there is much disagreement here in the broader sense. We’re basically just talking about varying degrees of alarm, from nonexistent to minimal.

I remain optimistic about his future but I was also probably expecting a little more out of the box based on what I saw at Vandy. Certainly fair to question whether or not initial expectations were fair. And PP popping has absolutely made a difference.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
Yes, we can, preferably without the use of straw man arguments. And I don’t think there is much disagreement here in the broader sense. We’re basically just talking about varying degrees of alarm, from nonexistent to minimal.

I remain optimistic about his future but I was also probably expecting a little more out of the box based on what I saw at Vandy. Certainly fair to question whether or not initial expectations were fair. And PP popping has absolutely made a difference.
Who used a straw man? Cite it specifically. I simply said if people can determine he is a bust based on his playing time, they probably messed up with a career choice. Its really less controversial than comparing him to a past Celtic bust or other rookies who are essentially being thrown into the fire.

Again, Nesmith has looked bad but even those pointing it out acknowledge that its early. Where can we go with that discussion?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
We all agree Nesmith has looked nervous/shaky over his first 4 games.

What does it mean now? Brad won't play him in high leverage situations (unless forced due to COVID/injuries)

What does it mean medium/long term? nothing
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,088
Who used a straw man? Cite it specifically. I simply said if people can determine he is a bust based on his playing time, they probably messed up with a career choice. Its really less controversial than comparing him to a past Celtic bust or other rookies who are essentially being thrown into the fire.

Again, Nesmith has looked bad but even those pointing it out acknowledge that its early. Where can we go with that discussion?
Nobody is saying that he’s a bust so what is the point of using that as the premise of a response?
 

cardiacs

Admires Neville Chamberlain
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,993
Milford, CT
You mean he's going to stop playing this year?

Or that his shot mechanics are so broken that he's going to have to rebuild it?

Fultz seems to me an opposite comp - Fultz was always more athletically gifted than anyone else he played against; could get anywhere he wanted on the floor; was super fluid; but had some physical/mechanical/psychological issues to address before making himself into a pretty good NBA player.

Nesmith is an okay athlete who works super hard; neexs to learn more about basketball; isn't very fluid; but knows eventually that his shots are going to fall.

Fultz could run an offense from Day 1; Nesmith is still learning rotations.

Just my view. YMMV.
I assume he’s talking psychologically, not in terms of game, but Fultz was really a one-off in that respect. Nesmith seems confident, grounded and secure from everything I’ve seen of him, and I haven’t heard anything negative about about his family or hangers-on the way you’d hear about Fultz’s mother and “trainer”. It’s always unwise to compare anyone to a black swan event, but I don’t get it at all in this case.
Sorry for lack of clarity in my post.
Danny is right, I was not comparing play style or skill, it's more of a feeling in terms of psychological makeup.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
Nobody is saying that he’s a bust so what is the point of using that as the premise of a response?
Help me. Nesmith has not played well but most here acknowledge that its too soon to draw any conclusions. Yet based on some of the posts, some conclusions appear to be coming into form.

Your objection with my wording, which I was deliberately careful with so as not to point at anyone in particular, seems to be how far we can go in drawing conclusions. Is that correct?

FTR, I am moving on - I don't see much actual disagreement here.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Nesmith wouldn't be the first NBA player to be lost and useless as a rookie that turns into a decent player a couple of years down the road. And Nesmith's potential value is 2-3 years out anyway; anything before that is just gravy at this point.
He wouldn't even be the first Brad Stevens era Celtic to do nothing as a rookie but turn into a decent player down the road.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,188
As someone that's followed them for 4 decades, I'm 100% sure Danny's strategy hasn't been based solely on hope.

Having a bench wing that can play defense and shoot competently from 3 (~38%) is the basic bar. That's all the Celtics need around the starting wings (Brown, Tatum, Smart). Considering Semi hit that mark last season and comes with a work ethic it wasn't a stretch to think he could do the job. 22yr old Grant was pretty much that in the 2nd half of last season (playoffs incl). Nesmith could be that eventually. Romeo and Green also add a different set of ++skills to the bench/wing roster. Not only have we received production, but Danny is also developing a roster of trade assets that could be added to the TPE between now and next season. This is exactly how some of us saw it before the season started.
Right, but the idea Grant and Nesmith are sufficient wing depth has been wrong. Semi has saved them.
 

shoelace

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 24, 2019
268
We all agree Nesmith has looked nervous/shaky over his first 4 games.

What does it mean now? Brad won't play him in high leverage situations (unless forced due to COVID/injuries)

What does it mean medium/long term? nothing
Exactly. DJBMH is totally right and I appreciate his interrogating the impulse to read too much into sporadic, mostly garbage time minutes for this young player. He's taken 19 shots in his career. The fact that Brad drew up a few plays for him and that he looked sharper on defense (though not without some lapses) is an encouraging sign.

It's interesting to think that the Hayward injury opened up more wing minutes and shots for Tatum in his rookie season. Obviously Tatum was more polished and talented than Nesmith, but it certainly gave him more of a chance to play and crucially to play through struggles. The same is true of Pritchard with Kemba's injury. Nesmith plays behind Tatum, Brown, Smart among others.

I think it's incredibly difficult to evaluate a bench player who may only get a handful of looks a night in sporadic minutes. It's probably more difficult for some rookies to go from being an offensive focal point who start to coming off the bench and fighting for opportunities. And I think the idea that because he isn't playing he isn't good feels less true because he's playing on a very good team with very good players in front of him, and a few roleplayers who are playing for contracts next season.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
Right, but the idea Grant and Nesmith are sufficient wing depth has been wrong. Semi has saved them.
Completely disagree. Grant, Romeo, Green, Nesmith after Semi are more than sufficient wing depth.

Unless you don't think 22yr old Grant or 21yr old Nesmith will improve

It's a long season. I wouldn't be surprised if Grant and eventually Romeo play even better than Semi by season's end.
 
Last edited:

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,618
Pritchard is good as fuck and it is not fair to compare Nesmith to him. Nesmith has hardly played and has looked like shit but it’s a crazy year and it’s crazy early. I have formed no opinion of him.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
I look at it like this....

We have a hypothesis we want to test. Nesmith is good at NBA basketball.

To pick arbitrary numbers, we want 10,000 data points before we have a strong enough signal to decide.

Right now, we have 10. Those 10 data points are that he sucks.

Do those 10 data points tell a lot about where the final 10,000 will end up? Honestly, not too much.

Would it be nice if the first 10 data points were good? Yeah, that would be nice.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
He was at the bottom of my list for possible selections at #14 and he’s much as advertised: Awful defensive footwork, rusty from an injury layoff, and trying to catch up to the speed of the NBA game. Marcus seriously needs to put Nesmith in the Smart AF Defensive Bootcamp and teach him proper defensive footwork. Anyway, historically it’s taken him a year to catch up with the speed of the game, I’m expecting the same this time. I’m not worried.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
As soon as Kemba comes back, wing depth is solved. Kemba and PP are the PGs, and JT, JJ, Smart, and Semi are the wings.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
11 games into the season, but he's only played in 4 of them.
Doesn’t that speak volumes on what the coaching staff knows from workouts, meetings, etc that we don’t see off the floor?

Of course nobody is calling him a bust 11 games in but like someone said above.....”everything matters” and the evaluation of a young player is continual so what we do see even early on does matter. I’d be disingenuous if we ignore any evaluation time and especially the first look we get at a player at a new level. It’s just that the majority of mid-1st round picks are busts and I’d say the chances of this occurring have increased (maybe quite a bit) since the draft.
 
Last edited:

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
11 games into the season, but he's only played in 4 of them.
Doesn’t that speak volumes on what the coaching staff knows from workouts, meetings, etc that we don’t see off the floor?

Of course nobody is calling him a bust 11 games in but like someone said above.....”everything matters” and the evaluation of a young player is continual so what we do see even early on does matter. I’d be disingenuous if we ignore any evaluation time and especially the first look we get at a player at a new level. It’s just that the majority of mid-1st round picks are busts and I’d say the chances of this occurring have increased (maybe quite a bit) since the draft.
Are we pretending that barely playing as a rookie isn't a common thing for Celtics first round picks?
  • 2019: Langford: 32 games, 370 minutes
  • 2018: Time Lord, 32 games, 283 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 388 minutes)
  • 2016: Yabusele: 33 games, 235 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 41 games, 251 minutes)
  • 2015: Rozier: 39 games, 311 minutes
  • 2015: RJ Hunter: 36 games, 315 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 3 games, 9 minutes fafter being cut by the C's)
  • 2014: James Young: 31 games, 331 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 199 minutes)
By contrast, Celtic draft picks who have played in their first year:
  • 2019: Grant, 78 games, 1219 minutes
  • 2017: Tatum (#3 overall): 80 games, 2443 minutes
  • 2017: Semi (round 2): 73 games, 1150 minutes
  • 2016: Brown (#3 overall): 76 games, 1341 minutes
  • 2014: Smart (#6 overall): 67 games, 1808 minutes
  • 2013: Olynyk: 70 games, 1400 minutes
Nesmith's path is more or less expected for a Celtic drafted where he was. Three of the 6 prior to him went on to be busts, 1 did not, jury still out on the other 2.

Pritchard is the guy who has no precedent, at least in the Stevens era.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Are we pretending that barely playing as a rookie isn't a common thing for Celtics first round picks?
  • 2019: Langford: 32 games, 370 minutes
  • 2018: Time Lord, 32 games, 283 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 388 minutes)
  • 2016: Yabusele: 33 games, 235 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 41 games, 251 minutes)
  • 2015: Rozier: 39 games, 311 minutes
  • 2015: RJ Hunter: 36 games, 315 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 3 games, 9 minutes fafter being cut by the C's)
  • 2014: James Young: 31 games, 331 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 199 minutes)
By contrast, Celtic draft picks who have played in their first year:
  • 2019: Grant, 78 games, 1219 minutes
  • 2017: Tatum (#3 overall): 80 games, 2443 minutes
  • 2017: Semi (round 2): 73 games, 1150 minutes
  • 2016: Brown (#3 overall): 76 games, 1341 minutes
  • 2014: Smart (#6 overall): 67 games, 1808 minutes
  • 2013: Olynyk: 70 games, 1400 minutes
Nesmith's path is more or less expected for a Celtic drafted where he was. Three of the 6 prior to him went on to be busts, 1 did not, jury still out on the other 2.

Pritchard is the guy who has no precedent, at least in the Stevens era.
I’m fine putting TL firmly in the “not a bust” category this point.
 

ColonelMustard

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2006
219
There are practice data points that we are not privy to. I think we can all agree that the jury is out on Nesmith. We, as external stakeholders, do not have the full information. Things we know:
  • He talks the talk. "Get 1% better every day"
  • He's still learning the schemes on offense and defense
  • He has lots of depth in front of him and had "tough defensive match-ups against teams like the Bucks, Nets, and Pacers" - CBS on his playing time
  • The Celtics used big wing lineups with Theis/Thompson further restricting his minutes.
  • He's looked lost at times but has played hard, crashed the boards, and played with exceptional athleticism (higher than I hoped).
  • He hasn't been able to develop his rhythm scoring off the bench to date (SS) .214%.
If you look at the minutes played by the rookies that are in the news, they have played 6,7,8th man minutes. It's understandable that Nesmith hasn't been able to accumulate the rate stats that a Maxey has.

I think the biggest disconnect lies in that we expected his shooting to translate quickly and it has not so far.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2021_rookies.html
37982
 

Attachments

Last edited:

ColonelMustard

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2006
219
Are we pretending that barely playing as a rookie isn't a common thing for Celtics first round picks?
  • 2019: Langford: 32 games, 370 minutes
  • 2018: Time Lord, 32 games, 283 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 388 minutes)
  • 2016: Yabusele: 33 games, 235 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 41 games, 251 minutes)
  • 2015: Rozier: 39 games, 311 minutes
  • 2015: RJ Hunter: 36 games, 315 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 3 games, 9 minutes fafter being cut by the C's)
  • 2014: James Young: 31 games, 331 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 199 minutes)
By contrast, Celtic draft picks who have played in their first year:
  • 2019: Grant, 78 games, 1219 minutes
  • 2017: Tatum (#3 overall): 80 games, 2443 minutes
  • 2017: Semi (round 2): 73 games, 1150 minutes
  • 2016: Brown (#3 overall): 76 games, 1341 minutes
  • 2014: Smart (#6 overall): 67 games, 1808 minutes
  • 2013: Olynyk: 70 games, 1400 minutes
Nesmith's path is more or less expected for a Celtic drafted where he was. Three of the 6 prior to him went on to be busts, 1 did not, jury still out on the other 2.

Pritchard is the guy who has no precedent, at least in the Stevens era.
Both Langford and Timelord had injury issues in their first year.
  • Langford was on the inactive list 26 times and had 14 DNPs while appearing in 32 games with two starts
  • Timelord was out with knee issues and suffered an injury in the preseason. In July 2018, Timelord was revealed to have (PAES) in both legs. Centers traditionally take longer to develop.
I want to see Nesmith develop and play significantly more minutes in the latter half of the season.
 
Last edited:

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
And going back further, Reggie Lewis had 400 minutes as a rookie. On a team that had no bench depth whatsoever.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Yeah, a rookie not playing doesn't mean much of anything. It's more about the eye test and to me he looks a bit slow but once he catches up, he'll be fine. I think the skills are there.

Obviously, you'd much rather have him playing like PP but it was probably never that realistic. I think many of us wanted him to come in and have the year Semi is having.

I would have picked Nesmith too back in June. I'm willing to give him at least until next year to make any real judgement on him. Forced to do a redraft right now, he'd probably fall to the bottom 3rd of the 1st round tho.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,740
Rotten Apple
I'd feel better about Nesmith if he was 19, but he's 21 and you'd expect a bit more polish. But he's clearly putting pressure on himself to produce in the small amount of playing time he's getting so far and that's a common rookie issue. I would say that when healthy, Romeo has shown more upside, especially defensively.

FYI, here are the players taken after Nesmith but before Pritch:
15. Cole Anthony
16. Isaiah Stewart
17. Aleksej Pokusevski
18. Josh Green
19. Saddiq Bey
20. Precious Achiuwa
21. Tyrese Maxey
22. Zeke Nnaji
23. Leandro Bolmaro
24. RJ Hampton
25. Immanuel Quickley

Anthony, Maxey, Bey, Achiuwa and Quickley have shown flashes that make you think they could be better that Nesmith.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I'd feel better about Nesmith if he was 19, but he's 21 and you'd expect a bit more polish. But he's clearly putting pressure on himself to produce in the small amount of playing time he's getting so far and that's a common rookie issue. I would say that when healthy, Romeo has shown more upside, especially defensively.

FYI, here are the players taken after Nesmith but before Pritch:
15. Cole Anthony
16. Isaiah Stewart
17. Aleksej Pokusevski
18. Josh Green
19. Saddiq Bey
20. Precious Achiuwa
21. Tyrese Maxey
22. Zeke Nnaji
23. Leandro Bolmaro
24. RJ Hampton
25. Immanuel Quickley

Anthony, Maxey, Bey, Achiuwa and Quickley have shown flashes that make you think they could be better that Nesmith.
I’m not buying this. Pretty much all the guys you list have been bad, albeit in different ways. I’m not convinced any of them would be seeing real playing time on the Celtics. Nesmith has also flashed real NBA skills in his limited opportunities, but he’s clearly not an NBA player yet. To be clear, I am not saying Nesmith has been better than any of the players you name. He hasn’t. I’m saying the differences remain not meaningful, and the playing time difference also isn’t meaningful.

I think people are over-judging Nesmith because going into this season we thought there was a real opportunity for him to gain minutes due to a lack of wing depth and he hasn’t. But that overlooks three important considerations in his lack of playing time.

First, there hasn’t been the wing depth problem many of us anticipated. Semi, and to a lesser extent Javonte, have both made very real improvements this year that make the wing rotation much harder to crack than most of us anticipated and there have also been fewer wing minutes period as Brad has prioritized finding minutes for all 3 centers.

Second, there haven’t been any guard/small wing minutes available because Pritchard has taken them all for himself. This isn’t all that different from the first point, but it’s another way Nesmith’s anticipated open pathway to playing time hasn’t materialized.

Third, we all forgot that the first rule of Brad playing rookies is defense. Nesmith not playing is something we all should have expected because he was never going to be ready defensively, we knew that, but we overlooked it as we got excited about the Celtics top pick this year. As he adjusts and learns how to defend in the system, he will start to earn minutes, but that might be a slow process for him and we need to just be patient as it plays out.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,740
Rotten Apple
Second, there haven’t been any guard/small wing minutes available because Pritchard has taken them all for himself. This isn’t all that different from the first point, but it’s another way Nesmith’s anticipated open pathway to playing time hasn’t materialized.
On this point, we are definitely in agreement.
 

SteveF

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,930
Some of this is just priors, right? If you weren't happy with the Nesmith pick, your reservations have been supported by what little evidence there is. If you were a fan of the Nesmith pick, well... the jury really is still out. At this point there's no reason to move off your priors.

I didn't like the pick, but I also REALLY didn't like the Pritchard pick and look how that turned out -- I was proven completely wrong in about 5-10 games.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
As soon as Kemba comes back, wing depth is solved. Kemba and PP are the PGs, and JT, JJ, Smart, and Semi are the wings.
Are people really satisfied with Semi being the top option off the bench for the 3 wing spots?

I think that's not close to good enough for a contender, and if any of the top 3 wings suffered an injury it's brutal.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,188
Are people really satisfied with Semi being the top option off the bench for the 3 wing spots?

I think that's not close to good enough for a contender, and if any of the top 3 wings suffered an injury it's brutal.
No, and I’m on your side here. That said, I think Smart is really the third wing in the playoffs for many purposes.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Are we pretending that barely playing as a rookie isn't a common thing for Celtics first round picks?
  • 2019: Langford: 32 games, 370 minutes
  • 2018: Time Lord, 32 games, 283 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 388 minutes)
  • 2016: Yabusele: 33 games, 235 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 41 games, 251 minutes)
  • 2015: Rozier: 39 games, 311 minutes
  • 2015: RJ Hunter: 36 games, 315 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 3 games, 9 minutes fafter being cut by the C's)
  • 2014: James Young: 31 games, 331 minutes (followed by a season 2 with 29 games, 199 minutes)
By contrast, Celtic draft picks who have played in their first year:
  • 2019: Grant, 78 games, 1219 minutes
  • 2017: Tatum (#3 overall): 80 games, 2443 minutes
  • 2017: Semi (round 2): 73 games, 1150 minutes
  • 2016: Brown (#3 overall): 76 games, 1341 minutes
  • 2014: Smart (#6 overall): 67 games, 1808 minutes
  • 2013: Olynyk: 70 games, 1400 minutes
Nesmith's path is more or less expected for a Celtic drafted where he was. Three of the 6 prior to him went on to be busts, 1 did not, jury still out on the other 2.

Pritchard is the guy who has no precedent, at least in the Stevens era.
These lists are making my initial post seem conservative. If you can play in this league you generally show it right away.....much more often then appearing lost early then suddenly finding oneself.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
No, and I’m on your side here. That said, I think Smart is really the third wing in the playoffs for many purposes.
Semi as the top backup at the three wing spots is already counting Smart as the third wing.

Tatum/Brown/Smart then Semi as the top backup for those three spots.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,188
Semi as the top backup at the three wing spots is already counting Smart as the third wing.

Tatum/Brown/Smart then Semi as the top backup for those three spots.
I think if it minutes-wise: Walker/Smart/TT/Theis/Tatum/Jaylen/PP all in for more than Semi. Line it up how you want amongst them.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Semi as the top backup at the three wing spots is already counting Smart as the third wing.

Tatum/Brown/Smart then Semi as the top backup for those three spots.
Pritchard will get plenty of backup minutes at the 2/small wing spot as he’s not going to be limited to 10-15 mpg backing up Kemba. Grant, Langford, Javonte, and Nesmith are all potentially in competition for the maybe 20 mpg that are left available if the Celtics are healthy for the playoffs and Theis isn’t playing any minutes at the 4. I’m currently comfortable with using that group based on development and matchups. Would I prefer that we had a better bench wing? Yes. But I don’t think it’s a glaring need so much as an area where an upgrade is possible if the right player is available at the right price.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Pritchard will get plenty of backup minutes at the 2/small wing spot as he’s not going to be limited to 10-15 mpg backing up Kemba. Grant, Langford, Javonte, and Nesmith are all potentially in competition for the maybe 20 mpg that are left available if the Celtics are healthy for the playoffs and Theis isn’t playing any minutes at the 4. I’m currently comfortable with using that group based on development and matchups. Would I prefer that we had a better bench wing? Yes. But I don’t think it’s a glaring need so much as an area where an upgrade is possible if the right player is available at the right price.
Pritchard is too small to play a wing spot. I don't think any 2 of Kemba/Pritchard/Teague should be on the floor together when games matter.

This roster is so imbalanced.

I think of the 9 best players they have, 3 should be point guard only, 3 should be center only, and 3 are wings. That's rough when you want 3 wings on the floor at the same time.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Pritchard is too small to play a wing spot. I don't think any 2 of Kemba/Pritchard/Teague should be on the floor together when games matter.

This roster is so imbalanced.

I think of the 9 best players they have, 3 should be point guard only, 3 should be center only, and 3 are wings. That's rough when you want 3 wings on the floor at the same time.
Lowry and VanVleet playing together worked just fine for Toronto (they weren’t a perfect team, but that combo wasn’t the problem). And it definitely wasn’t a problem the year before when VanVleet played off the bench in the exact role I’m envisioning for Pritchard (25 mpg backing up the 1/2 spots).
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,157
But aren't those two both considered to be really excellent defenders? I don't think PP, KW, or JT are in their league defensively.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Some of this is just priors, right? If you weren't happy with the Nesmith pick, your reservations have been supported by what little evidence there is. If you were a fan of the Nesmith pick, well... the jury really is still out. At this point there's no reason to move off your priors.

I didn't like the pick, but I also REALLY didn't like the Pritchard pick and look how that turned out -- I was proven completely wrong in about 5-10 games.
This sounds right to me. I didn't like the Nesmith pick since shooting is basically the least translatable skill from college to the NBA; I don't like investing draft assets in shooters as a rule. But it's also the most prone to sample issues and adjustments when you get into the league. If you liked Nesmith despite his overall profile, there's nothing so far that should really change.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,883
This sounds right to me. I didn't like the Nesmith pick since shooting is basically the least translatable skill from college to the NBA; I don't like investing draft assets in shooters as a rule. But it's also the most prone to sample issues and adjustments when you get into the league. If you liked Nesmith despite his overall profile, there's nothing so far that should really change.


Is this really true? I'd love to see something on this.

As far as priors, these were my predraft thoughts:

18. Aaron Nesmith (He has the tools to defend, but he didn't really do it well at Vandy- there's just a lot of really poor recognition and/or effort when you watch him. Also has shown very little aptitude for moving the ball with a grotesque 0.6 A/TO. The incredible shooting makes him a pretty good fit for our roster though, and there's the possibility that the defensive lapses were the result of a very heavy offensive burden.

Post-draft, I talked myself into him more (as I've been doing with Celtics draft picks for a couple of decades now), so I think that's where my real bias lays (lies?), but fandom’s more fun when it’s at least slightly irrational, so I’m good with it. But his 60 minutes in the NBA, or the fact that he's only played 60 minutes, to this point, shouldn't really move the needle at all. I think HRB's overstating the point. My guess is if you go down NBA rosters, you'll find tons of guys for whom the playing time and/or quality in the first fifth of their first season isn't particularly predictive, especially when drafted outside of the top 10 or so.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,272
L
He was at the bottom of my list for possible selections at #14 and he’s much as advertised: Awful defensive footwork, rusty from an injury layoff, and trying to catch up to the speed of the NBA game. Marcus seriously needs to put Nesmith in the Smart AF Defensive Bootcamp and teach him proper defensive footwork. Anyway, historically it’s taken him a year to catch up with the speed of the game, I’m expecting the same this time. I’m not worried.
Is this sarcasm? I thought Nesmith was your top option for the 14th pick and you generally loved the pick?
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Lowry and VanVleet playing together worked just fine for Toronto (they weren’t a perfect team, but that combo wasn’t the problem). And it definitely wasn’t a problem the year before when VanVleet played off the bench in the exact role I’m envisioning for Pritchard (25 mpg backing up the 1/2 spots).
If one of the Celtics little guys could defend like Lowry, then I'd agree they could play together even though it still wouldn't be optimal.

I don't see that. Lowry is short, but he isn't small.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
Pritchard will get plenty of backup minutes at the 2/small wing spot as he’s not going to be limited to 10-15 mpg backing up Kemba. Grant, Langford, Javonte, and Nesmith are all potentially in competition for the maybe 20 mpg that are left available if the Celtics are healthy for the playoffs and Theis isn’t playing any minutes at the 4. I’m currently comfortable with using that group based on development and matchups. Would I prefer that we had a better bench wing? Yes. But I don’t think it’s a glaring need so much as an area where an upgrade is possible if the right player is available at the right price.
Yep, agreed.
We're eons away from the playoffs, doing rotation minutes now is premature. BUT at the moment it would be ~20mpg split between Semi/Grant/Romeo/Greene/Nesmith. None of them would be expected to be a top 3 offensive option when on the floor. Brad probably opts for the best defensive option based on the matchup.

The Celtics are fine, Danny has time to see how they develop this season. Semi is improving. Grant/Romeo are young. They are building asset value. No interest in any of the names thrown around at the moment (Ariza, RHJ).

That being said, Danny should be looking to add talent between now and the trade deadline by using the TPE and assets.

I hated the Wanamaker/Kemba pairing last year but Brad will run the double PG unit.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Is this sarcasm? I thought Nesmith was your top option for the 14th pick and you generally loved the pick?
In the “I can’t believe this pick!!!” section of the thread I defended the selection because I understood it, but if you go back to the draft thread you’ll see he was at the bottom of the guys I evaluated at #14. That doesn’t mean that I hated it, just that of the six guys I looked at he was sixth.

So, ranking them?
  1. R.J. Hampton
  2. Josh Green
  3. Saddiq Bey
  4. Precious Achiuwa
  5. Jaden McDaniels
  6. Aaron Nesmith
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
In the “I can’t believe this pick!!!” section of the thread I defended the selection because I understood it, but if you go back to the draft thread you’ll see he was at the bottom of the guys I evaluated at #14. That doesn’t mean that I hated it, just that of the six guys I looked at he was sixth.
You and @DannyDarwinism did a ton of research pre-draft for the Board. Posting tons of info, links, opinions on numerous players 1-60... I think it's nuts if anyone criticizes what you two added

If I recall correctly, RJ Hampton's defense/size/handle and work on his shooting held a lot of your interest. You liked Precious & Josh Greens' defense. And you definitely liked S. Bey over Nesmith (but not the other Bey)... Patrick Williams (Jaylen comps) & Vassell (your favorite 3&D wing) were your fingers crossed reach at 14.

OTOH myself & others were panting over Nesmith 50%+ 3pt shooting :eek:
I'm still optimistic Aaron can get it together over the next few months. But Brad's leash will be short.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
This sounds right to me. I didn't like the Nesmith pick since shooting is basically the least translatable skill from college to the NBA; I don't like investing draft assets in shooters as a rule. But it's also the most prone to sample issues and adjustments when you get into the league. If you liked Nesmith despite his overall profile, there's nothing so far that should really change.
When do you feel evaluation periods begin to matter? Small samples from a statistical analysis mean little however from a traditional evaluation the size becomes less relevant. Otherwise there would be as little reason to be excited about Ball, Wiseman, Achiuwa, Quickley, Pritchard, etc as there would be reason to be at all concerned about someone as clearly lost as Nesmith.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
You and @DannyDarwinism did a ton of research pre-draft for the Board. Posting tons of info, links, opinions on numerous players 1-60... I think it's nuts if anyone criticizes what you two added

If I recall correctly, RJ Hampton's defense/size/handle and work on his shooting held a lot of your interest. You liked Precious & Josh Greens' defense. And you definitely liked S. Bey over Nesmith (but not the other Bey)... Patrick Williams (Jaylen comps) & Vassell (your favorite 3&D wing) were your fingers crossed reach at 14.

OTOH myself & others were panting over Nesmith 50%+ 3pt shooting :eek:
I'm still optimistic Aaron can get it together over the next few months. But Brad's leash will be short.
Brad's leash is always short for guys with flaws on D in particular, but any time where people are not getting the actions on either end. Clearly the game is too fast for Nesmith right now. That doesn't mean that he won't adjust. But Brad won't throw him minutes just because. If he's constantly in the wrong place at the wrong time, he's going to sit. Pritchard seems to be more or less at NBA speed already, so he's getting lots of minutes. If Nesmith were shooting 50% from 3 now, he'd still be getting shit minutes. It means nothing.

Nesmith would be getting more minutes out of necessity if Green and particularly Semi weren't holding their own at wing. They're not going to step on their own dicks out there, so they're getting the minutes. This is how Brad has always been. I don't know why anyone's reading into it.