What should we do in the 2010 NBA Draft?

[libermaniac]

Maybe, wanting to repeat his success with taking Giddens, from New Mexico, Danny goes for another Lobo in Darington Hobson:

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Darington-Hobson-5833/


Just a joke ... I think Hobson will pull his name from the draft if not a guaranteed 1st rounder (which I'm hoping, as a Lobo fan, is what happens).

[clover]

But I am a full-fledged member of the "Sheed's Attitude is Killing This Team" camp.  I don't like giving away picks just to free up money, but I think in this case, it's addition by subtraction.

(1) Trade him to another team for a comparably awful contract
(2) Buy him out

I think both options are better than trading the first round pick.

Agreed, they are much better options, but I don't know if it something the team would want to do, or be able to do.  This is an additional option to move him, if another team out there is willing.

As a frame of reference for other posters, here are the last 10 players to be picked 19th in the draft:

Jeff Teague
JJ Hickson
Javaris Crittendon
Quincy Douby
Hakim Warrick
Dorell Wright
Sasha Pavlovic
Ryan Humphrey
Zach Randolph
Jamaal Magloire

Only Randolph and Magloire have made the All-Star Team (and they have both bounced around the league over their careers), so the odds of finding a potential star to build a team around at 19 are pretty slim.

I'd take a 20% chance of an All-Star in Danny's hands.

[Fan from VT]

I'm sure Danny has a much better eye for talent than do I. However, he's not perfect. He drastically overrated Telfair and underrated Roy; sure, with revisionist history you can say that we also unloaded Lafrentz for Ratliff that led to KG, but honestly, Don't you think that Roy+Lafrentz for 2 years (after seeing that Roy was an NBA stud for a full season) is still a more enticing deal than Telfair+Ratliff for 1 year?

Well, I think Danny knew exactly what he was doing with that trade, and while I am sure he wasn't specifically targeting Garnett, he knew Ratliff's contract was immensely valuable.  I do think he underrated Roy though, since I don't think he had any interest in taking him there, even if he did keep the pick.  Although the injuries are starting to pile up a bit now.

So, would any of those teams (including boston) do:
19+52 for 21+32?
19+52 for 26+32?
19+52 for 25+28?
19+52 fro 27+31?

What if they wand Davis in the deal too? Perk? There are some possibilities here. But leaving out trading players for now, are any of those pick swaps realistic?

If so, I see a lot of the same type of talent available in that range. Maybe one of those teams REALLY likes a guy at 19 that won't slip to them. If you could trade away #19 and #52 and come away with any combination of two from:

Larry Sanders, Eric Bledsoe, Willie Warren, Pondexter, Stanley Robinsion, Ebanks, Avery Bradley, James Anderson, Orton, etc.,

Would you do that?

I think that is a legit possibility, if those teams would consider it just with the picks (although I don't think that is likely, unless they really fall in love with a player who slips to 19).

I certainly would not include Perk or Davis in a deal like that, since I think either of them are worth a first round pick on their own, not just as a sweetener to move down in the draft.  But this team needs to restock with some young talent (assets), if they want to reload, and the best way to do that is to get some extra draft picks.

Now, if a team is willing to give a lottery pick for Perk, or a late first rounder for Davis, I could see them trade them straight up.  

yes, just to clarify i meant including perk or davis as a possibility for some type of hypothetical larger deal, if they were giving back picks and some other player, for example.

However, I would probably do 19+Davis for 21+26 with OKC. I think we can do better than Davis with 26 in this draft (and cost controlled), and moving back from 19 to 21 isn't that bad.

[Who]

I'm sure Danny has a much better eye for talent than do I. However, he's not perfect. He drastically overrated Telfair and underrated Roy; sure, with revisionist history you can say that we also unloaded Lafrentz for Ratliff that led to KG, but honestly, Don't you think that Roy+Lafrentz for 2 years (after seeing that Roy was an NBA stud for a full season) is still a more enticing deal than Telfair+Ratliff for 1 year?

Well, I think Danny knew exactly what he was doing with that trade, and while I am sure he wasn't specifically targeting Garnett, he knew Ratliff's contract was immensely valuable.  I do think he underrated Roy though, since I don't think he had any interest in taking him there, even if he did keep the pick.  Although the injuries are starting to pile up a bit now.

So, would any of those teams (including boston) do:
19+52 for 21+32?
19+52 for 26+32?
19+52 for 25+28?
19+52 fro 27+31?

What if they wand Davis in the deal too? Perk? There are some possibilities here. But leaving out trading players for now, are any of those pick swaps realistic?

If so, I see a lot of the same type of talent available in that range. Maybe one of those teams REALLY likes a guy at 19 that won't slip to them. If you could trade away #19 and #52 and come away with any combination of two from:

Larry Sanders, Eric Bledsoe, Willie Warren, Pondexter, Stanley Robinsion, Ebanks, Avery Bradley, James Anderson, Orton, etc.,

Would you do that?

I think that is a legit possibility, if those teams would consider it just with the picks (although I don't think that is likely, unless they really fall in love with a player who slips to 19).

I certainly would not include Perk or Davis in a deal like that, since I think either of them are worth a first round pick on their own, not just as a sweetener to move down in the draft.  But this team needs to restock with some young talent (assets), if they want to reload, and the best way to do that is to get some extra draft picks.

Now, if a team is willing to give a lottery pick for Perk, or a late first rounder for Davis, I could see them trade them straight up.  

I like the idea of trying to trade both Perk + BBD for a mid-to-late lottery pick + late first rounder respectively.

Three first round picks and Rajon Rondo. That is a nice place to start rebuilding. Maybe add a quality young player with the MLE if someone with enough quality is available (eg Ty Thomas).

That would put the Celtics in a good position heading into either 2011 or 2012 for rebuilding.

[Birdbrain]

Has anyone ever predicted correctly what Danny's done in the draft?  I don't mean anyone who said he liked Rondo before Danny acquired Rondo, I mean someone who said, "I think Danny will pick..."?

No although I'm sure some think they have.  He always seems to have people believing in things he would never do (white tatted up ginger dude that went to Seattle, Trading Rondo lol).  And then when he doesn't do them it's because the C's got lucky but, he was ' really ' going to do it.

[Chris]

I'm sure Danny has a much better eye for talent than do I. However, he's not perfect. He drastically overrated Telfair and underrated Roy; sure, with revisionist history you can say that we also unloaded Lafrentz for Ratliff that led to KG, but honestly, Don't you think that Roy+Lafrentz for 2 years (after seeing that Roy was an NBA stud for a full season) is still a more enticing deal than Telfair+Ratliff for 1 year?

Well, I think Danny knew exactly what he was doing with that trade, and while I am sure he wasn't specifically targeting Garnett, he knew Ratliff's contract was immensely valuable.  I do think he underrated Roy though, since I don't think he had any interest in taking him there, even if he did keep the pick.  Although the injuries are starting to pile up a bit now.

So, would any of those teams (including boston) do:
19+52 for 21+32?
19+52 for 26+32?
19+52 for 25+28?
19+52 fro 27+31?

What if they wand Davis in the deal too? Perk? There are some possibilities here. But leaving out trading players for now, are any of those pick swaps realistic?

If so, I see a lot of the same type of talent available in that range. Maybe one of those teams REALLY likes a guy at 19 that won't slip to them. If you could trade away #19 and #52 and come away with any combination of two from:

Larry Sanders, Eric Bledsoe, Willie Warren, Pondexter, Stanley Robinsion, Ebanks, Avery Bradley, James Anderson, Orton, etc.,

Would you do that?

I think that is a legit possibility, if those teams would consider it just with the picks (although I don't think that is likely, unless they really fall in love with a player who slips to 19).

I certainly would not include Perk or Davis in a deal like that, since I think either of them are worth a first round pick on their own, not just as a sweetener to move down in the draft.  But this team needs to restock with some young talent (assets), if they want to reload, and the best way to do that is to get some extra draft picks.

Now, if a team is willing to give a lottery pick for Perk, or a late first rounder for Davis, I could see them trade them straight up.  

I like the idea of trying to trade both Perk + BBD for a mid-to-late lottery pick + late first rounder respectively.

Three first round picks and Rajon Rondo. That is a nice place to start rebuilding. Maybe add a quality young player with the MLE if someone with enough quality is available (eg Ty Thomas).

That would put the Celtics in a good position heading into either 2011 or 2012 for rebuilding.

And it would be even better if they are able to trade Davis and Perk to teams under the cap, creating trade exemptions to help fill some of the holes.  That would be the most intriguing part of a Davis and #19 for #21 and #26 deal.  It would not only give the C's two kicks at the barrel, it also would give them $3 million to play with, in order to bring in a replacement via trade.

[Birdbrain]

I'm sure Danny has a much better eye for talent than do I. However, he's not perfect. He drastically overrated Telfair and underrated Roy; sure, with revisionist history you can say that we also unloaded Lafrentz for Ratliff that led to KG, but honestly, Don't you think that Roy+Lafrentz for 2 years (after seeing that Roy was an NBA stud for a full season) is still a more enticing deal than Telfair+Ratliff for 1 year?

Well, I think Danny knew exactly what he was doing with that trade, and while I am sure he wasn't specifically targeting Garnett, he knew Ratliff's contract was immensely valuable.  I do think he underrated Roy though, since I don't think he had any interest in taking him there, even if he did keep the pick.  Although the injuries are starting to pile up a bit now.

So, would any of those teams (including boston) do:
19+52 for 21+32?
19+52 for 26+32?
19+52 for 25+28?
19+52 fro 27+31?

What if they wand Davis in the deal too? Perk? There are some possibilities here. But leaving out trading players for now, are any of those pick swaps realistic?

If so, I see a lot of the same type of talent available in that range. Maybe one of those teams REALLY likes a guy at 19 that won't slip to them. If you could trade away #19 and #52 and come away with any combination of two from:

Larry Sanders, Eric Bledsoe, Willie Warren, Pondexter, Stanley Robinsion, Ebanks, Avery Bradley, James Anderson, Orton, etc.,

Would you do that?

I think that is a legit possibility, if those teams would consider it just with the picks (although I don't think that is likely, unless they really fall in love with a player who slips to 19).

I certainly would not include Perk or Davis in a deal like that, since I think either of them are worth a first round pick on their own, not just as a sweetener to move down in the draft.  But this team needs to restock with some young talent (assets), if they want to reload, and the best way to do that is to get some extra draft picks.

Now, if a team is willing to give a lottery pick for Perk, or a late first rounder for Davis, I could see them trade them straight up. 

yes, just to clarify i meant including perk or davis as a possibility for some type of hypothetical larger deal, if they were giving back picks and some other player, for example.

However, I would probably do 19+Davis for 21+26 with OKC. I think we can do better than Davis with 26 in this draft (and cost controlled), and moving back from 19 to 21 isn't that bad.

The 26th pick will be better than Davis at 3 million?  I would love to see it. You might have a point with Shelden.

[Jon Niednagel]

I'm sure Danny has a much better eye for talent than do I. However, he's not perfect. He drastically overrated Telfair and underrated Roy; sure, with revisionist history you can say that we also unloaded Lafrentz for Ratliff that led to KG, but honestly, Don't you think that Roy+Lafrentz for 2 years (after seeing that Roy was an NBA stud for a full season) is still a more enticing deal than Telfair+Ratliff for 1 year?

Well, I think Danny knew exactly what he was doing with that trade, and while I am sure he wasn't specifically targeting Garnett, he knew Ratliff's contract was immensely valuable.  I do think he underrated Roy though, since I don't think he had any interest in taking him there, even if he did keep the pick.  Although the injuries are starting to pile up a bit now.

So, would any of those teams (including boston) do:
19+52 for 21+32?
19+52 for 26+32?
19+52 for 25+28?
19+52 fro 27+31?

What if they wand Davis in the deal too? Perk? There are some possibilities here. But leaving out trading players for now, are any of those pick swaps realistic?

If so, I see a lot of the same type of talent available in that range. Maybe one of those teams REALLY likes a guy at 19 that won't slip to them. If you could trade away #19 and #52 and come away with any combination of two from:

Larry Sanders, Eric Bledsoe, Willie Warren, Pondexter, Stanley Robinsion, Ebanks, Avery Bradley, James Anderson, Orton, etc.,

Would you do that?

I think that is a legit possibility, if those teams would consider it just with the picks (although I don't think that is likely, unless they really fall in love with a player who slips to 19).

I certainly would not include Perk or Davis in a deal like that, since I think either of them are worth a first round pick on their own, not just as a sweetener to move down in the draft.  But this team needs to restock with some young talent (assets), if they want to reload, and the best way to do that is to get some extra draft picks.

Now, if a team is willing to give a lottery pick for Perk, or a late first rounder for Davis, I could see them trade them straight up.  

yes, just to clarify i meant including perk or davis as a possibility for some type of hypothetical larger deal, if they were giving back picks and some other player, for example.

However, I would probably do 19+Davis for 21+26 with OKC. I think we can do better than Davis with 26 in this draft (and cost controlled), and moving back from 19 to 21 isn't that bad.

'Sota has a ton of picks and a need for a true center. I wouldn't mind dealing with them again.

[winsomme]

Larry Sanders:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0t3iKQCkzY

[Chris]

I don't watch college basketball so I'm just going on what I have read and heard about players .... but I think Paul George sounds very interesting.

I like the idea of drafting George and starting him at shooting guard alongside Pierce and Rondo and dumping Ray Allen.

Just did some reading about George, and he sounds like the kind of guy to really keep your eyes on.

In the past, Danny has always loved guys who fly under the radar out West (Banks, Giddens, Tony Allen), who he can scout on his trips out to Utah.  This guy is right in his wheelhouse.  

He also gives them pretty much exactly what they would be looking for.  From the scouting reports I have read, he is a very good athlete, has excellent size, and can shoot from distance.  He also is supposed to be a decent defender, and have a high BBIQ.  Sounds like a good fit to me.  

[jdpapa3]

Definitely have to go Best Player Available. Even if it's a pg. Just about every 1st round talent has declared and that helps our cause a lot.

[winsomme]

This is a really good Larry Sanders video too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snJT38veuew

[lon3lytoaster]

Larry Sanders:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0t3iKQCkzY

The problem with Larry Sanders is of course that classic red flag some people overlook. "Didn't start playing until his junior year." That's a quote from nbadraft.net and more times than not, players like that take an extremely long time to develop or they're complete busts. Think Gerald Green.

I would say we need to draft a forward, though.

[LarBrd33]

package something with the #19 and try to move up to take a legit big man.  Anybody on the board worth taking?

I'd package Glen Davis, but I doubt anyone wants that bum.  I'd consider packaging Perk with the #19 if we could net something substantial.

[clover]

Perk's way underrated here, and a team full of rookies is a bad idea.  I'll be happy with two first-rounders and moving some of the old wood sooner rather than later--not guys at 25 and under.