This is technically true, but it's cold comfort if Fultz is the best of all of those assets, which is highly possible if not outright likely.
The Plan For the #1, er, #3 Overall Pick?
- Thread starter pdaj
- Start date
Also thanks for the update.Lol, that's "SRN" to you! ("Tony Armas" spelled backwards, for any noobs).
Note to Heavy De: Kliq really likes Westbrook. He might reply to this and say he doesn't, but a bunch of snarky posts in the regular season thread to anyone who dares question his flawlessness would disagree.
I mean, @Kliq: I don't have anything against RW personally, if that's what you're getting at. He's clearly "transcendent" in terms of doing things the last couple of seasons that no NBA player has ever done. But again, assuming we're talking about buiIding a real-world championship contender starting this Summer, I don't think there's anything particularly controversial about what I said: (1) "it's hard to build a great team around a 6'-3" hyper-ball-dominant PG who isn't a great shooter or a good defender" and (2) "I'd be wary of a high-mileage 28.5 year-old whose best quality is his freak athleticism."
(And yes, he is plainly a stat-padder, though I think a good coach could wean him off that).
I'm definitely not going to die on the sword of Butler > Westbrook, though, if that's what we're talking about. Butler rates great by RPM, but I agree with the general consensus that he's just short of LeBron-Kawhi-KD-Curry-level elite; he has suboptimal length (6'-8" wingspan) and three point stroke for a wing; and he's almost 28 as well.
I'll stand by — again, from a team-building perspective — preferring Giannis (22), Towns (21), and Davis (24) over Westbrook. I'd probably take Paul George (a lot longer than Butler, better 3 pt shooter, and almost a year younger), Jokic, Gobert and Embiid (if his health checks out) over Westbrook too.
Are there any Cs fans here who would actually be psyched about selling off the Fultz pick and building around Westbrook?
Good summary. I agree with everything except for Butler being "just short" of LeBron, et. al level elite.
I think Butler was great last year (probably the best he will ever be) and I am admittedly not as high on Bulter as many others (i.e. get him at all costs), but I think it is really reaching to try to put him on or near LeBron's level.
Butler is definitely a star now and I know some of the metrics really love him, but after watching last night and the entire Bulls series, it is just obvious to me from my plain sight that LeBron is on a different planet when it comes to talent compared to Butler.
Plenty of top picks miss in terms of being a top 10/transformational player, though, is my point.
I am only posting because everyone seems to be ignoring literally every shade of gray in order to put forward their black or white view of the world, and it's fucking frustrating as hell to just read a bunch of dudes either talking past each other or giving each other high fives based on which color they've chosen.
I am only posting because everyone seems to be ignoring literally every shade of gray in order to put forward their black or white view of the world, and it's fucking frustrating as hell to just read a bunch of dudes either talking past each other or giving each other high fives based on which color they've chosen.
Bradley isn't the only Celtic guard, who's a free agent after next season. Thomas is too. Keeping Fultz gives you options in case you don't want to max out your 5'9" point guard. Fultz could have an understudy/learning season before stepping into more of a lead role, the following year.
Yeah, agreed. The way he's playing right now on both ends of the floor, he's on his own freaking tier. Probably more accurate to say Butler is "well short" of that tier, "short" of the next tier of wings (Kawhi and Durant), and "just short" of Paul George — largely because George is a legit 6'-9" with a 7-foot wingspan, so can much more comfortably slide over to the four, which brings a ton of versatility in terms of roster-building in today's NBA. (Basically, George can match up physically with Durant and LeBron where Butler cannot, really).
I guess I'd put Butler on a tier with James Harden. Harden's a much more gifted offensive player, but give me Butler's D and intangibles (seems to take better care of his body, seems like a better leader, doesn't seem as prone to disappearing in games, clubbing hard during the playoffs, getting with the Kardashians, etc.)
If not for the GS/Cle hegemony, I'd be very tempted to try to go all-in, sell off all the young assets, and build around a Big 3 of George + Butler + Thomas (all great players and high character dudes in that age 27-28 GFIN sweet spot). But given the reality of the GS/Cle hegemony, I'm inclined to agree with Baseball Jones' strategy.
Last edited:
In small doses LeBron is the best player on the planet by far. That he can't keep up that level of play for an entire season is the only thing that lets the other guys even get near his level.
The next level is probably just Steph, Kawhi, CP3, and Durant in terms of already developed guys.
I agree that you can project Davis, Giannis to that level.
After that you have a bunch of guys that have different skills and strengths but will jump around in relative value based on year to year fluctuation, randomness, and situation. I hear what you say on George but he was on a higher trajectory before the leg injury. The question is whether he can be on that path again and this last year was just a down year from being disappointed with the Pacers rebuild, etc. (I know he put up more points but everywhere else he was not as good as in the past)
I'm a little more down on KAT as a transformational guy as to be that you've got to play some fucking defense. Not sure what Thibs is doing over there but those guys play defense like they are only thinking about their next possession.
As for Westbrook, there is certainly something to be said for the ability to be so ball-dominant and still be good. But you can't ignore how ball dominant he is when looking at his counting stats.
The next level is probably just Steph, Kawhi, CP3, and Durant in terms of already developed guys.
I agree that you can project Davis, Giannis to that level.
After that you have a bunch of guys that have different skills and strengths but will jump around in relative value based on year to year fluctuation, randomness, and situation. I hear what you say on George but he was on a higher trajectory before the leg injury. The question is whether he can be on that path again and this last year was just a down year from being disappointed with the Pacers rebuild, etc. (I know he put up more points but everywhere else he was not as good as in the past)
I'm a little more down on KAT as a transformational guy as to be that you've got to play some fucking defense. Not sure what Thibs is doing over there but those guys play defense like they are only thinking about their next possession.
As for Westbrook, there is certainly something to be said for the ability to be so ball-dominant and still be good. But you can't ignore how ball dominant he is when looking at his counting stats.
Last edited:
Great post and really well summarizes the different tiers and some of the shortcomings on why guys are on different tiers.
Last edited:
Agreed. I think of it as: Westbrook makes it easy to be an OK or pretty good team, cos there is actually a lot of value in being able to score with average-ish efficiency at such an absurdly, historically high usage rate. But if you want to to take the next step to being really good or elite, I think it's a pretty big impediment to have the lion's share of your scoring load given over to a guy whose scoring efficiency is in the .520-.560 true shooting range, as opposed it to the .620-.660 range where LeBron, KD, Kawhi and Steph typically reside.
2016/17 playoff scoring per 36:
James 29.6 pts on .662 true shooting
Leonard 27.9 pts on .672 true shooting
Curry 29.8 pts on .672 true shooting
Durant 26.4 on .643 true shooting
Westbrook 34.7 pts on .511 true shooting
(And then you factor in that LeBron, Leonard and KD all have the size to impact the game defensively in a way that Curry and Westbrook just physically cannot).
That is a great point. I think it all comes down to hitting on a high lottery pick is still probably the safest way to get a top 10/transformational player.
There is also tons of luck involved as to when the lottery pick is made. Winning the first pick to draft LeBron or Duncan can change a franchise.
Winning the lottery and picking Bennett would doom a franchise unless said franchise already had LeBron and was well on its way to getting him back.
The Celts just need to hope that Fultz ends up somewhere between Kyrie and LeBron on the first pick scale and nowhere near Bennett.
I like Fultz and want the Cs to draft and keep him, however, if Danny likes Tatum as much would Fultz for Tatum and the Lakers 18 #1 be a good value play? That adds another piece to the future window.
The Lakers don't have an 18 #1. It's going to Philadelphia.
Oh I see. You want PHI to convey the pick to the C's.
Not sure PHI would be up for that, they need as many tickets as possible to find good players. Maybe if they are really really in love with Fultz.
Oh I see. You want PHI to convey the pick to the C's.
Not sure PHI would be up for that, they need as many tickets as possible to find good players. Maybe if they are really really in love with Fultz.
If Danny really was in love with Tatum, then I like that idea a lot more than Saric or especially like whoa man especially Okafor (sorry, I have heard others not on this site mention Okafor as a piece they would want the Celtics to get in order to swap with Philly and it makes my brain hurt).
One thing I think people are missing with trading the pick - doing so kills your cap room. Keeping the pick allows the Celts to potentially sign Hayward as a free agent (with some adjusting of cap space - likely renouncing Zeller as I believe his contract is not guaranteed). If you trade the pick, the the salary of Butler or George goes on the cap and you no longer have that opportunity.
I'm of the opinion that the only way the Celts should trade the pick is for Porzingas. He could cover up the rim protection and size issues while spreading the floor even more on offense. Combined with Hayward, that would be the equal of any other team. Otherwise I think Fultz could operate quite well in a three guard offense.
I'm of the opinion that the only way the Celts should trade the pick is for Porzingas. He could cover up the rim protection and size issues while spreading the floor even more on offense. Combined with Hayward, that would be the equal of any other team. Otherwise I think Fultz could operate quite well in a three guard offense.
The problem with trading for late 20s slashers is that you need to win a title within the Cleveland/Golden State window when it will be the most difficult.
Look, I love Jimmy Butler, and the only reason I didn't throw my whiskey tumbler at my TV that fateful night when Boston passed him by for JuJuan fucking Johnson is that I'd just bought the thing the month before (and they would almost certainly have won one more title if they didn't decide that it was more important to draft another big man and someone 6'4" over a backup for Rondo). But he isn't enough to get Boston by the two titans. (And lest any noobs think I'm saying this as a testimony to my scouting skills, I'm not exactly known for being rational where Marquette guys are concerned. For example I was totally convinced that Vander Blue was going to be a solid rotation guard and I still think Henry Ellenson will be a good starting 4.)
Now, if the Bulls were willing to discuss something built around Jaylen? Sure, that would work. But no on Fultz. He's a pick & roll player with a great jumpshot, essentially tailor made for the pace & space era of the game.
538 (from last year) on "What To Look For In An NBA Draft Prospect": https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-to-look-for-in-an-nba-draft-prospect/
He has statistical benchmarks in there for each position--Fultz is way over on all of them except shooting percentage.
He has statistical benchmarks in there for each position--Fultz is way over on all of them except shooting percentage.
Do we think that if the #1 pick is dealt, it would be on draft night?
Basically, Danny would draft Fultz #1 and then take phone calls. He basically goes in with an idea of what players he wants and what fair value is and then just sees if the offers are there.
Basically, Danny would draft Fultz #1 and then take phone calls. He basically goes in with an idea of what players he wants and what fair value is and then just sees if the offers are there.
That's huge. Now Utah can't extend the super-max deal to Hayward. IIRC, they can obviously offer him the regular 5-year max while any other team can offer the 4 year max.
Neither Hayward nor George made it, which means that Utah's financial advantage over Boston's is minimized in free agency and that George is probably now officially on the market.
Is there any scenario where George actually signs and extension with Boston? I mean there is no way the Celts should trade the #1 pick for one year of George.
From everything I have read, George plans on being a Laker in 2018.
Unless George puts pen to paper on a max contract contingent on the trade, I don't try to get him. There's just too much risk involved trading for him if his end game is LA.
That is certainly what Magic implied heavily in the pre-lottery coverage on NBA on XM. He said they don't plan to be active in this year's free agency as he believes most of the biggest names will stay home. The summer after however he said they'd be active and that they believed more players would be willing to move especially to LA to play for the Lakers. He all but named George. It's pretty clear PG's not an option here, period.
It gets overlooked, but yes, this is fundamental problem 1B with any trade (problem 1A is the two superteams still in our way). Once you grab Butler and account for the raises of the other pieces on the roster, you're maxed out besides whatever trade possibilities remain (always a dicier proposition given how hard it is to actually match up on a trade in the league).
Not necessarily.
George isn't a FA until after next season so he could make the all NBA team next year which would allow Indiana to offer him a super-max deal.
I'm not sure if he was just throwing shit at the wall or not, but Chad Ford was on ESPN Radio yesterday discussing Paul George and basically said that if the Lakers didn't go out of their way to acquire him this summer he'd probably be more open to a trade to a contender. He wants out of Indy period.
Yeah, no doubt George has no interest in a lame duck year in Indiana. But one year of George is worth a late first/early second at best. If the Pacers are holding out for something in the lottery, I can't imagine anyone giving them that.
Doesn't Hayward qualify for the supermax if he makes 2nd or 3rd team all NBA this year?
According to David Aldridge: "The criteria for a veteran DPE are similar to those for players on their rookie deals -- the player has to have been league MVP (or, in the veterans’ case, Defensive Player of the Year) or made one of the three All-NBA teams the previous season, or been All-NBA/DPOY in two of the previous three seasons, or league MVP once in the previous three seasons."
Am I misreading this?
I don't think Boston would trade Fultz for George, and Indiana, in light of Bird's interview a few weeks ago, is an interesting case. According to Bird he wasn't allowed to rebuild the way other teams are, because ownership insists that the Pacers make a run at the postseason every year. So that he was required to nail mid round draft picks year in and year out (his only two dips into the lottery produced #10 picks, which he turned into Paul George and Myles Turner).
Up until now Indiana has been insisting on NBA ready players for George, with high upside additions, and that the other team eat Monta Ellis' contract (likely to clear the space for the Pacers to make a run at Hayward). But Boston could, conceivably, fill Indiana's plate without Fultz.
For one thing a starting point of Thomas and Brown gives Indiana its high upside prospect to go along with a player capable of taking them to the playoffs in 2018. Making it part of an Olynyk sign & trade would give the Pacers a guy that would look pretty good in that setting (with two floor spacers at the 4/5 it would make life much easier on all their perimeter slashers). Boston could also move Bradley for draft picks to sweeten the pot. There'd be a lot of options there.
LA needs to send back expensive roleplayers in any transaction, which is going to make any deal less palatable for the Pacers who would be locked out of the free agent market for the immediate future as a result. So Indiana would really have to like Ingram and someone at #2 to go there (which might be the case, I haven't got a read on the new guys yet).
All three teams have been named.
First: Westbrook - Harden - Davis - James - Leonard
Second: Curry- Thomas - Gobert - Durant - Giannis
Third: Wall - DeRozan - Jordan - Butler - Green
While that's true, Indiana would be betting the house on George making a very crowded all-NBA team on which only six forwards get listed. If he'd made the cut this year, Indiana would know that he wasn't going anywhere, and would make no moves to trade him. Now they officially have uncertainty and a real chance that they lose him for nothing when the year's over.
Thanks! I had only seen the first team selections. Hmmm.... Butler made it, but Paul George didn't.
I don't think Ainge would do IT4 and Jaylen for George at this point, and I don't think he would consider the Fultz pick for him either. I don't see how Indy has really any leverage here. I think something like AB or Smart with Olynyk and the 2018 Nets pick would be what Ainge would be willing to do, and I don't think Indy would do that.
Does George just want to go home to LA or specifically to play for the Lakers? I was under the impression it was the latter.
Yes, it is Pierce. I don't remember the exact quote but it was along he lines of "you move the pick to get one of these guys".
My understanding was that he grew up a Clippers fan, but given their cap situation the easiest route home would be to the Lakers.
There have only been hints from "unnamed sources" about George's desire to play for the Lakers. And for some reason, these little bits of info have exploded into "George only wants to play for LAL". I am skeptical of the whole thing, and I imagine Danny would know far better than any of us on what George's plans would be in the summer of 2018
Jordan SchultzVerified account @Schultz_Report 17s17 seconds ago
Multiple teams have fallen in love w/Josh Jackson. Is perhaps highest upside player in this draft and has a legit shot to go first overall.
Multiple teams have fallen in love w/Josh Jackson. Is perhaps highest upside player in this draft and has a legit shot to go first overall.
Jordan SchultzVerified account @Schultz_Report 2h2 hours ago
Re #NBADraft, pay very close attention to De'Aaron Fox. Sources have told me there's a fairly good chance he goes ahead of Ball and Jackson.
ha.
I wouldnt necessarily hate it, I just wish he could shoot.