Trading for Jahlil Okafor

[The Rondo Show]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Especially on a team loaded with excellent perimeter defenders – like Boston

[IDreamCeltics]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

[PhoSita]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

[The Rondo Show]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

Whaaaaat? He shot 66%, led the ACC in scoring and won ACC POY en route to a national title.

[Eddie20]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I think he's referring to subpar rebounding and weak defense. Okafor in college averaged 8..5 RPG and 1.4 BPG in 30,.1 MPG. For comparison, Olynyk averaged 7.3 RPG and 1.1 BPG in 26.4 MPG. This has transcended to the NBA with the added caveat of him being an atrocious defender in the PNR, something that he didn't have to a lot of, in any, at Duke.

[IDreamCeltics]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I meant that he's the same player he was in college: a dominant post scorer who doesn't pass, hustle, play defense, or rebound especially well.  His per game numbers from college and the NBA are basically identical.

I'm surprised this got any heat at all.  He is what he is.

[Moranis]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I think he's referring to subpar rebounding and weak defense. Okafor in college averaged 8..5 RPG and 1.4 BPG in 30,.1 MPG. For comparison, Olynyk averaged 7.3 RPG and 1.1 BPG in 26.4 MPG. This has transcended to the NBA with the added caveat of him being an atrocious defender in the PNR, something that he didn't have to a lot of, in any, at Duke.

To be fair, these are Tim Duncan's freshman year statistics: 9.8 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 0.9 apg, 0.4 spg, 3.8 bpg, 1.2 tpg, 30.2 mpg.  So Duncan showed to be a good defender, but not a very good passer or scorer.  A lot can change when you are a 19 year old big man.  I mean David Robinson barely played as a freshman at Navy.

[alewilliam789]

Said this in another thread and I stick by it:



That's not the shot chart of someone who can only play inside. At 20-years-old, he's undeniably an offensive prodigy. Here's a taste of his abilities - a career high 31 against Dallas:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKnwVCBkeEg

He's unstoppable one-on-one and should command a double-team most times he touches the ball. That in itself is extremely valuable -- especially since Boston can surround him with shooters like IT, Bradley, Crowder, Olynyk, etc. He averaged 20 pts on 63% FG after the all star break. Again, he's 20.

There's no doubt he needs to improve his defense. He often shows little-to-no interest on that end, which is definitely disconcerting.

However, his nightmare supporting cast in Philly doesn't help. Hollis Thompson, Isaiah Canaan, Nik Stauskas, etc have no hope of containing penetration. Jah is a bit of a sitting duck there.

Boston -- with so many elite perimeter defenders -- is one of few teams who can hide him in my opinion.

If we don't land a potential star, i.e. Simmons, Ingram or Bender, we should go all in on Jah. Given we'd probably need to add a sweetener, but the deal is a no-brainer for Philly if Dunn or Murray is on the board.

I completely agree with you. I want Ingram, but if we pick 3 or lower this is the direction to take. We already have 70 guards on this roster, and if you believe the hyperbole on this board every single one of them is a star because Ainge never, ever misses on a draft pick.

The one place I disagree with you is the rotting corpse of Bender. He is NEVER going to be a useful NBA player, and if Ainge burns a lottery pick on that scrub, I will be here calling for his job.

There is a boatload of wrong in this thread about Okafor. His feet are NOT slow. They are more than adequate to teach him how to rotate in the Celtics' defensive system. He is never going to be all-defense, but he can be an above average defender on a good basketball team as he matures.

Ainge was on the money to kick the tires on this one at the trade deadline, and if the pick falls to 3 or below he should actively pursue this.

Exactly!! If we pick Bender, who literally is mediocre in every statistical measure including athleticism, than I will do the same. People are saying that Okafor would be no help to this defense, but the simple fact is that we only have one player that averages 1 or more blocks per game on this roster and it's Amir Johnson. In his rookie year Jah averaged 1.4 BPG which is on par with players like Vucevic and Brook Lopez. If you are willing to except that those players will be serviceable defenders than I believe Okafor can develop into one as well. Also everyone claiming that Jah makes his team worse because they averaged so many PPG more with him on the bench, take into account he was practically playing the PF with Noel being so inept beyond 5 feet from the rim. He was playing in a new system, in a new league, without any floor spacing. He had to shoot shots that he's taken very few of in his career at Duke from the high post because he was forced into this PF position by Sam Hinkie thinking that he can play 2 centers on the court together. Everyone knows how that went with Omer Asik and Dwight in Houston. Terribly wrong.
I would easily sell high on a good playoff performance by Smart with picks to grab Jah and keep Dallas' pick. Draft a player like Zhou Qi or Furkan Korkmaz who people are highly underrating and we can draft and stash.
Sign Al Horford so he can play PF alongside OKafor and help him develop even more.

PG:Isaiah Thomas
SG: Avery Bradley
SF: Jae Crowder
PF: Al Horford
C: Jahlil OKafor
That's a very good squad right there that would have good chemistry together as well.
 

[Eddie20]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I think he's referring to subpar rebounding and weak defense. Okafor in college averaged 8..5 RPG and 1.4 BPG in 30,.1 MPG. For comparison, Olynyk averaged 7.3 RPG and 1.1 BPG in 26.4 MPG. This has transcended to the NBA with the added caveat of him being an atrocious defender in the PNR, something that he didn't have to a lot of, in any, at Duke.

To be fair, these are Tim Duncan's freshman year statistics: 9.8 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 0.9 apg, 0.4 spg, 3.8 bpg, 1.2 tpg, 30.2 mpg.  So Duncan showed to be a good defender, but not a very good passer or scorer.  A lot can change when you are a 19 year old big man.  I mean David Robinson barely played as a freshman at Navy.

Remember too that Duncan was a swimmer and didn't take up basketball until around 14 or so. That said, he always defended the rim and rebounded well, even at such a young age. Okafor's slow feet and lack of athletic ability would be a strong indicator that he'll be poor defender.

[Moranis]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I think he's referring to subpar rebounding and weak defense. Okafor in college averaged 8..5 RPG and 1.4 BPG in 30,.1 MPG. For comparison, Olynyk averaged 7.3 RPG and 1.1 BPG in 26.4 MPG. This has transcended to the NBA with the added caveat of him being an atrocious defender in the PNR, something that he didn't have to a lot of, in any, at Duke.

To be fair, these are Tim Duncan's freshman year statistics: 9.8 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 0.9 apg, 0.4 spg, 3.8 bpg, 1.2 tpg, 30.2 mpg.  So Duncan showed to be a good defender, but not a very good passer or scorer.  A lot can change when you are a 19 year old big man.  I mean David Robinson barely played as a freshman at Navy.

Remember too that Duncan was a swimmer and didn't take up basketball until around 14 or so. That said, he always defended the rim and rebounded well, even at such a young age. Okafor's slow feet and lack of athletic ability would be a strong indicator that he'll be poor defender.

Andre Drummond 10 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 0.4 apg, 0.8 spg, 2.7 bpg in 28.4 mpg.  Respectable shot blocking skills from Drummond, but that is about it. 

This notion that college stats are indicative of ultimate NBA success is silly. 

[PhoSita]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I meant that he's the same player he was in college: a dominant post scorer who doesn't pass, hustle, play defense, or rebound especially well.  His per game numbers from college and the NBA are basically identical.

I'm surprised this got any heat at all.  He is what he is.

I don't really agree with that characterization.

But in any case, what I'm suggesting is that context matters a lot.  Obviously Jahlil contributed in a major way to a very successful team in college.

Then in the NBA he went to a team that was set up pretty much as badly as a team could be set up for a player with Jahlil's skillset.

It is no surprise at all that he didn't look so great in that context.  What is surprising is that he was still very productive for a rookie despite the state of the roster around him.

[CoachBo]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I meant that he's the same player he was in college: a dominant post scorer who doesn't pass, hustle, play defense, or rebound especially well.  His per game numbers from college and the NBA are basically identical.

I'm surprised this got any heat at all.  He is what he is.

I don't really agree with that characterization.

But in any case, what I'm suggesting is that context matters a lot.  Obviously Jahlil contributed in a major way to a very successful team in college.

Then in the NBA he went to a team that was set up pretty much as badly as a team could be set up for a player with Jahlil's skillset.

It is no surprise at all that he didn't look so great in that context.  What is surprising is that he was still very productive for a rookie despite the state of the roster around him.

TP.

The mischaracterization of Okafor's ability on this board boggles my mind.

[alewilliam789]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

I meant that he's the same player he was in college: a dominant post scorer who doesn't pass, hustle, play defense, or rebound especially well.  His per game numbers from college and the NBA are basically identical.

I'm surprised this got any heat at all.  He is what he is.

Besides the fact that he averaged ridiculous amounts of WS both defensively and offensively. He had 6.7 total WS in college!! That is ridiculous and indicative that he can be the player that carries his team to wins as he did with Duke. Simmons WS are 6 with an amazing statistical college season. Dwayne Wade 6.5 as a soph. Carmelo Anthony had 5.8. These are superstar players, besides maybe Ben Simmons of course. Even Andrew Wiggins only put up 0 DWS last year after being recognized as one of the best defenders in the draft. Jahlil at least put up better DWS than that as a rookie at .9. Jahlil is the player we want and if I'm Ainge and we don't get 1 I'm trading it. For me the only player that I see becoming better than Jahlil is Ben Simmons so it's Ben Simmons or trade out.
 

[LarBrd33]

What I don't understand is why people look at what he did in Philly and assume it has anything to do with what he'd look like on a decent well-coached team.

Probably because it's exactly what he did in college on a decent well-coached Duke team.

You mean, operate out of the post as a top scorer for a team that won a national championship?

Lol.  TP. 

Look, I barely care about this debate.  A couple people here are being straight-up irrationally negative about Okafor's time.  Is he going to be as good as Karl Towns?  Very unlikely.  Is he some scrub?  Of course not.  That dude can play.  Offensively, he can be a game-changer for a team.  Defensively, he needs work.  But he's 20 years old and it's pretty obvious he's an elite prospect in this league by any measure of "elite prospect".  Again, I don't know how fans can be so hypocritical to give a guy like Marcus Smart a pass after two straight seasons of ghastly offensive play, while at the same time acting like Okafor is a finished product incapable of ever improving.   It's easier for a poor defender to develop into a mediocre defender than it is for a poor offensive player to develop into a mediocre offensive player.

And at the end of the day, we're all rooting for Boston to land the #1 pick.  If they end up 4-6, there's a fairly good chance that the player we draft will be significantly worse than Okafor.   I don't get the premise that anyone we draft there is automatically going to be better than the 20 year old rookie coming off a season with per-36 numbers of 21 points, 8.4 rebounds, 1.4 blocks with 51% shooting.  That's a pretty stupid premise, honestly... and anyone who expects that the guys taken 4-6 are a lock to be that productive as rookies is setting themselves up for disappointment.   Also, don't count on the idea that Philly will gleefully give up their stud prospect for one of those guys.  There's a pretty decent chance they'll have better options in the trade market.

The amount of scoffing at Jabari Parker and Jahlil Okafor on this forum this season is pretty ridiculous.  I'm rooting for the best outcome in the draft, but I'm entirely prepared to see us take a guy who can't hold Parker or Okafor's jock.   If Parker disappointingly peaks out as the next Glenn Robinson and Okafor disappointingly peaks out as the next Al Jefferson, can you really sit there hyper-criticizing their flaws while the #4 pick ends up the next Dion Waiters or Thomas Robinson? 

[tankcity!]

Okafor has a nice wingspan, and I think he is more agile than Brook Lopez. I believe he can grow as a defender. He just really needs to work on his jumpshot.

I would trade Bradley, and a couple first round picks. I would try to keep the Brooklyn pick. I really do think the Sixers could use a player like Bradley. Also with a different regime, I think they would value a player like Bradley higher than others.

Get it done Danny. I really think he can be the franchise player we need.