By the end of the 2016 draft, the Celtics are currently on track to have a roster of something like:
Expected to be major pieces:
Olynyk
Sullinger
Smart
[Max contract UFA]
2015 BOS 1st (lottery)
2016 BKN 1st (likely lottery)
Hopefully useful, but not (yet) major pieces:
Young
Bradley
[Possibly re-sign Zeller, 2016 RFA]
2015 LAC 1st (likely not lottery)
2015 PHI 2nd (likely top pick of round)
2016 BOS 1st (likely not lottery)
2016 CLE 1st (likely not lottery)
2016 DAL 1st (likely not lottery)
That's already 13 players, or 3-4 more than you'd expect to have in your regular rotation. I haven't included veteran signings apart from one free agent, or the likelihood that something interesting will come out of one of the other 2nd rounders. One or two of the 2016 1st might start in Maine, but even so, there would be a roster crunch pretty quickly.
The question is, should we indeed select this many 1st rounders, or should we package them for a smaller number of higher picks. 538 did a study (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-is-winning-the-nba-draft-lottery-really-worth/) suggesting that the proper value for four non-lottery first rounders is approximately the third and fourth picks in a typical draft. That strikes me as more than most GMs would actually give us for them, which means there's more value in keeping them, except of course for the roster crunch. Similarly, Danny's been good at finding late first-round gems; with four such picks, it would be all that much more sensible to take players with question marks and high upside like Melo and Sullinger, knowing that it's okay to miss some of the time. I suppose keeping players in Europe for a season or two is another option, but the team listed above is very likely a playoff team in 2015-16 and adding four first rounders to a playoff team should be able to produce a contender almost immediately; over the first five seasons, the, say, 10th, 20th, 23rd, and 25th picks would on average be worth about 45 win shares. But, again, that assumes they all get to play enough to contribute that much, which is the key question. Especially because your late first rounders are more likely to be complementary pieces than major ones.
So, what's the best plan here? Package assets? Or swing for the fences with most of these picks and assume that you'll hit on some, miss on others, and you really only need to worry about the hits?
Expected to be major pieces:
Olynyk
Sullinger
Smart
[Max contract UFA]
2015 BOS 1st (lottery)
2016 BKN 1st (likely lottery)
Hopefully useful, but not (yet) major pieces:
Young
Bradley
[Possibly re-sign Zeller, 2016 RFA]
2015 LAC 1st (likely not lottery)
2015 PHI 2nd (likely top pick of round)
2016 BOS 1st (likely not lottery)
2016 CLE 1st (likely not lottery)
2016 DAL 1st (likely not lottery)
That's already 13 players, or 3-4 more than you'd expect to have in your regular rotation. I haven't included veteran signings apart from one free agent, or the likelihood that something interesting will come out of one of the other 2nd rounders. One or two of the 2016 1st might start in Maine, but even so, there would be a roster crunch pretty quickly.
The question is, should we indeed select this many 1st rounders, or should we package them for a smaller number of higher picks. 538 did a study (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-is-winning-the-nba-draft-lottery-really-worth/) suggesting that the proper value for four non-lottery first rounders is approximately the third and fourth picks in a typical draft. That strikes me as more than most GMs would actually give us for them, which means there's more value in keeping them, except of course for the roster crunch. Similarly, Danny's been good at finding late first-round gems; with four such picks, it would be all that much more sensible to take players with question marks and high upside like Melo and Sullinger, knowing that it's okay to miss some of the time. I suppose keeping players in Europe for a season or two is another option, but the team listed above is very likely a playoff team in 2015-16 and adding four first rounders to a playoff team should be able to produce a contender almost immediately; over the first five seasons, the, say, 10th, 20th, 23rd, and 25th picks would on average be worth about 45 win shares. But, again, that assumes they all get to play enough to contribute that much, which is the key question. Especially because your late first rounders are more likely to be complementary pieces than major ones.
So, what's the best plan here? Package assets? Or swing for the fences with most of these picks and assume that you'll hit on some, miss on others, and you really only need to worry about the hits?