2020-2021 Celtics Season

Brad kept him away from centers that are low post scorers and he needs that experience. It's a shame he missed most of last year and didn't get more practice time with Kanter. The big problem is we have no one for him to practice against right now to improve and there just aren't many of those guys in the league. It's going to take him time, like he needs a whole playoff series versus Embiid and likely more than that.

It's Covid, the roster and this crazy season in my book. So many young guys, we can't get fully healthy and Chemistry is crazy hard when Walker keeps missing games.

Tatum and Brown compliment each other on D, yet I don't see it on offense. It's nothing negative like Embiid and Simmons. One day they might get there, yet it's not ideal right now. You talk players that compliment each other I think Stockton and Malone, Pippen and Jordan, KG, Pierce, and Allen, Shaq and Kobe, Kobe and Gasol, Shaq and Wade, LeBron and Davis. Tatum and Brown is more like LeBron and Wade or Leonard and George. It could work, certainly isn't close to the biggest issue, yet it's not currently ideal. I can see it happening, they just aren't there yet. You never see them playing off each other, playing two man ball and there both driving scorers that can shoot. 

It's why I wanted Ball so bad, his passing and creating would have been perfect to tie those two together. Like Ben Simmons would be perfect, Kemba Walker isn't.

Ball is a great passer but he’s not necessarily a crazy good creator/ floor general. He’s actually better when the offense isn’t running thru him as the primary guy. It’s more run thru Zion, but he’d still fit great.

Worst fanbase in the NBA I swear to God.

Is he better or did his shooting just improve in a new role? I actually agree with with Ball's dad that they are waisting his talents in his current role. Maybe I'm wrong, yet I've always been crazy high on him. I think he could be a modern day Jason Kidd in the right offense with the right talent around him.

Jokic is on pace to dethrone Willis Reed as the best second round pick in the history of the NBA. So if that's your standard, then every GM is bad at drafting besides one guy.

This whole thing is comical. I don't know how one bad year of team building has turned into Danny is bad at drafting.

Lonzo Ball rookie year 10.2 points, 6.9 rebounds, 7.2 assists, 1.7 steals and .8 blocks. Outside of points, his other numbers are all currently down, that's not typical. People notice him this year because his shooting is better, 3 point percentage 30.5, 32.9, 37.5 and 38.4 the last four years.

I mention his rookie year because that's the only year he's been allowed to be the guy. His second year had LeBron, his third year had Holiday and this year they aren't treating him like a PG.

On the right team, I see him being just like Rondo was for the big three. The glue that really made that work. A guy who creates first and scores second. A guy that makes people around him better by helping get them easy shots. Keeps the ball moving and makes sure everyone is involved.

Look at what Smart can do in our offense, Ball is just a lot better. He can do so many things Smart can't and he knows and embraces his role. He doesn't want to be a SG, go to scorer like Smart does.

This exact debate over Ainge's level of success/ability in drafted has been discussed often and at length over in SoSH and CelticStrong. The exact answer depends upon what your exact definition of "success" is and the variables you deploy to measure it. (For examples, most everyone agrees that missing players late in the draft who were NOT highly regarded by anyone is NOT a reliable measure since ALL GMs do this each year so often. OR, should a GM draft low floor/high ceiling lottery tickets later in the draft as opposed to "safe" picks. Should we use win shares? Counting stats? As all member here will know, the metrix used helps determine the answer. Here, all I will only introduce a few points on this topic.)



This is one way that made sense to me, though not everyone chooses to use it....fine.



Data that looks at the number of players from each draft spot who eventually made a career* in the NBA was one generally accepted measure. Roughly speaking, the further down the draft you go the fewer the number of players who have NBA careers. Common sense here.



Over the past 15 years or so, 75%ish of those players picked in the 1-10 slots made the NBA. The 11-20 slots, around 50%. And 21 to 30 was about 25%. Second round picks came in at around 20%, which was higher than I had thought they would be.



So.....How does Ainge's drafting history match with these crude measurements? Fairly well given the small sample sizes involved. He was below average in the second round success, but above average in the non-lottery category, and has hit some home runs in when drafting in the top 10.



Here are a few articles that may prove helpful in the discussion:



sportsanalytics.berkeley.edu/articles/trash-or-treasure.html



This article ranked Ainge of 13th in the NBA GM in drafting, but admits that it is NOT including Brown or Rozier. And of course not Tatum or Pritchard either.



bleacherreport.com/articles/2715633-metrics-101-ranking-nba-draft-track-records-for-each-teams-commander-in-chief



towardsdatascience.com/measuring-success-in-the-nba-draft-a7f67cfb7718



*"Made a career" means they were starters on NBA teams for 8 years or more. It doesn't say they were stars or lousy players or role players.

Yes. For second rounders the definition of success is different. I should have mentioned that. Thank you.

Hahahahaha....

All he has to show for it are Pritchard and Williams... Smart, Brown and Tatum don’t count. LOLOLOLOL

Have you even looked at who was drafted around Brown Tatum and Smart? No one thought Tatum was the best player in thag draft - not even me a Duke homer. Almost everyone thought they were crazy not to take Fultz and anyone else thought Ball was the pick.

Rozier was another great pick... the fact he’s not here isn’t due to Ainge the drafted.

The team you are hating on for “being in 8th place” is practically the same team that was just in the ECF. Don’t be dumb just for the sake of being a hater.

Nobody is truly great at drafting IMO. Too many variables like desire, character and work ethic. Especially in these days of drafting 19 year olds and going more off of potential than what they have actually accomplished. Luck is a big part of it when your'e going off of athleticism which a lot of it is these days. I like taking the more accomplished 21 year olds later in the draft as they are easier to project but you get fewer home runs from them. Guys like Pritchard and Grant Williams, they will be role players in the NBA but they won't be busts.

You keep talking about drafting top 6 and it being a foregone conclusion of success when I just gave you 2 examples in one draft that Danny should get an A+ for the Tatum deal. He deserves an A for Brown and a B+ for smart, if not an A. So he is 3 for 3 when drafting top 6. How many guys were a bust out of the top picks in those drafts? Andrew Wiggens and Jabari Parker went 1,2 in Smarts draft. Oakafor went #3, Hezonja #5, Mudlay #7 Johnson #8, Kaminskey went #9, Lyles #12, Payne #14 the year Rozier went #16 just to name a few. So Rozier was a better pick than half the guys taken ahead of him and that doesn't take into consideration the names of the guys taken after him who had big names and have done less.

Danny has done a very good job drafting IMO. What he has been great at is trading. That is why other GM's are weary of dealing with him, they don't want too look like they got fleeced like others before them.