Author Topic: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?  (Read 29906 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #15 on: August 27, 2016, 09:32:45 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
"wasted" isn't the right term to be using.  Danny utilized them.  Apparently not to the OP's liking but they were utilized, not wasted.

having said that, the only disappointments for me in the past few years concerning assets are:
- taking Young over Hood in the draft.  wanted Hood but at the time was ok with taking Young and I understand the decision to take a riskier pick with higher potential at #17.
- not being able to consolidate 8 picks this year other than to use 31 and 35 to get a future first that's likely to end up in the 20's.  as far as who Danny picked with the 6 remaining picks, I'm fine with those selections.  Yabu seemed a bit of a reach at 16 but it's not like the kid wasn't projected for the first round.

No issue with the Hunter pick at 28 or Mickey at 33.  both looked like solid value picks at those points.  Both could turn into something.  Young I think is pretty much toast unless he shows an incredibly unexpected improvement in training camp.   I think that 15th spot is going to Hunter over Young, Bentil and Holland based on his shooting and effort over Bentil's size.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2016, 11:12:24 AM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
Not really.

Ainge missing on a draft pick shouldn't surprise anyone at this point.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #17 on: August 27, 2016, 11:20:29 AM »

Offline bdm860

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5945
  • Tommy Points: 4586
I don't believe late 1st round picks are cut all the time.  Sure they often don't get a second contract, but cut before the original 3 years is actually fairly rare.

What are you talking about, it happens all the time Fab Melo, JuJuan Johnson, JR Giddens, Gerald Green.  Oh wait you're talking about non-Celtics players  ;D

But seriously though, I think it happens enough.  You say 3 years and are specifically talking about being cut, but I would use 4 years, as 1st round rookie contracts are 2 years guaranteed plus 2 one year team options before the player hits restricted free agency.  So going back 10 years, how many 1st round rookies didn't make it past 3-4 years in the league?

2006: 6 guys made it 3 years, 6 guys made it only 4 years
2007: 4 guys made it 3 years or less,5 guys made it only 4 years, 1 guy has never played
2008: 2 guys made it 3 years or less, 1 guy made it only 4 years
2009: 3 guys made it 3 years or less, 2 guys made it only 4 years
2010: 4 guys made it 3 years or less, 3 guys made it only 4 years
2011: 5 guys made it 3 years or less, 0 guys made it only 4 years*
2012: 5 guys made it 3 years or less, 24 guys haven't made it past 4 years! Oh wait I have to stop counting at this point.

*excluding foreigners who came over later like Jonas Valanciunas, Nikola Mirotic, etc.

It seems to me, depending on the year, anywhere from 10% to 40% of first rounders don't make it past 4 years in the league (though I'd say the average is probably closer to 15-20%).  And then we have a variety of reasons of why that happens.

In some cases you have injuries (Jonny Flynn, Greg Oden) or other issues (Royce White, Javaris Crittenton) keeping a player from playing, but on the flip side you have a lot of 10 day contracts keeping a player in the league to even get up to or past 3-4 years at all (DJ White, Terrence Williams, Elliot Williams, Jordan Hamilton, etc.).  Some times a players contract is just allowed to run out and/or the team option isn't picked up (Joe Alexander, Patrick O'Bryant), other times he's shipped around the league as trade filler, and some just happen to have a dad whose a GM.

Again, I know you specifically said players being cut on rookie contracts, so already we may be talking about apples and oranges here.  I'm just saying I would broaden that criteria a little, and a decent amount of teams would have "wasted" a first rounder on a player that they ended up getting little-to-no value from.

After 18 months with their Bigs, the Littles were: 46% less likely to use illegal drugs, 27% less likely to use alcohol, 52% less likely to skip school, 37% less likely to skip a class

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #18 on: August 27, 2016, 11:29:25 AM »

Offline GratefulCs

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3181
  • Tommy Points: 496
  • Salmon and Mashed Potatoes
Not really.

Ainge missing on a draft pick shouldn't surprise anyone at this point.
any gm missing on a draft pick shouldn't surprise anyone at this point
I trust Danny Ainge

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #19 on: August 27, 2016, 11:50:22 AM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19479
  • Tommy Points: 1871
It happens all the time, IMO. Heck, on other teams, it happens to lotto picks. I'm glad ours are still in the league (KO and Smart). I think JB will stick around as well.

KO was not a lottery pick.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #20 on: August 27, 2016, 01:28:38 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
It happens all the time, IMO. Heck, on other teams, it happens to lotto picks. I'm glad ours are still in the league (KO and Smart). I think JB will stick around as well.

KO was not a lottery pick.

Yes he was.  The lottery is #1-14, and he was pick #13.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #21 on: August 27, 2016, 01:43:24 PM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
That's how disappointing KO is, he isn't even thought of as a higher pick lol.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #22 on: August 27, 2016, 02:11:03 PM »

Offline Chief Macho

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1247
  • Tommy Points: 84
Yes.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #23 on: August 27, 2016, 02:59:25 PM »

Offline vjcsmoke

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3173
  • Tommy Points: 182
Not really.  Late 1st round picks/Early 2nd round picks don't make it in this league all the time.

Young is probably the most disappointing pick out of the bunch, he never developed his game.

I'd probably rather keep RJ Hunter over Young.  Maybe he can finally find that shooting stroke he showed in college.  It's gonna be tough for any of them to make it because of our roster crunch.

But I'd rather have the problem of cutting down potential talent, then having to find scrubs to fill the end of the roster.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #24 on: August 27, 2016, 03:03:26 PM »

Offline Bobshot

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2050
  • Tommy Points: 141
Lottery picks seem to be the only valuable picks. Brown looks like a decent pick at #3 with a chance for success. All the rest of those mid first rounders aren't worth much, at this point.

The Celtics are a winning team which drafts in the mid first round now. The only picks Ainge has of value are the Nets picks, which have a chance at the lottery.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #25 on: August 27, 2016, 03:26:20 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
Only disappointing one is pick 17 in 2014. The 28th and 51st picks arent anything to get upset about.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #26 on: August 27, 2016, 03:36:35 PM »

Offline Granath

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2154
  • Tommy Points: 567
Only disappointing one is pick 17 in 2014. The 28th and 51st picks arent anything to get upset about.

Disappointing is the right word.

I liked getting Young 17th in 2014. I thought he was the type of "swing for the fences" pick that the Cs in 2014 needed to try. I cheered when we made that pick.

But sometimes when you swing for the fences you strike out. That's what happened in this case. It'd be nice to have Garry Harris or Rodney Hood instead but we could just as well have Tyler Enis, Mitch McGary or Jordan Adams instead and be cutting one of those guys this year as well.

As for some other picks - like #28 and #51 - those aren't wasted assets. Something like 70% of all 2nd rounders never become anything. So striking out there is like a pinch hitter stepping to the plate behind 0-2 in the count. Getting a hit in that situation isn't likely. Neither is drafting a productive NBA player.

Jaylen Brown will be an All Star in the next 5 years.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #27 on: August 27, 2016, 05:02:28 PM »

Offline loco_91

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
  • Tommy Points: 145
Sunk costs. You don't waste your asset when you cut someone-- you waste it when you draft a guy who will never amount to anything. Better to cut them than to waste a roster spot on them.

I'm not mad that Ainge has whiffed on some late 1sts and 2nds--every GM does that, it's just the nature of the draft.

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #28 on: August 27, 2016, 11:55:36 PM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324
Only disappointing one is pick 17 in 2014. The 28th and 51st picks arent anything to get upset about.

Disappointing is the right word.

I liked getting Young 17th in 2014. I thought he was the type of "swing for the fences" pick that the Cs in 2014 needed to try. I cheered when we made that pick.

But sometimes when you swing for the fences you strike out. That's what happened in this case. It'd be nice to have Garry Harris or Rodney Hood instead but we could just as well have Tyler Enis, Mitch McGary or Jordan Adams instead and be cutting one of those guys this year as well.

As for some other picks - like #28 and #51 - those aren't wasted assets. Something like 70% of all 2nd rounders never become anything. So striking out there is like a pinch hitter stepping to the plate behind 0-2 in the count. Getting a hit in that situation isn't likely. Neither is drafting a productive NBA player.

I completely agree with you.

The only problem, though, is that if someone pans out who was picked after 28, or after 51, the Danny haters will suddenly spring up and proclaim to us that they knew that said player was gonna be a stud, and that Danny doesn't know what he's doing, and that if they were running the team we would already have had 3 more banners, and that Danny should be fired.

It really sucks. Unfortunately we see it every year. Oh well. It is what it is.
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: Anyone upset about the wasted assets?
« Reply #29 on: August 28, 2016, 10:00:56 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33431
  • Tommy Points: 1532
I don't believe late 1st round picks are cut all the time.  Sure they often don't get a second contract, but cut before the original 3 years is actually fairly rare.

What are you talking about, it happens all the time Fab Melo, JuJuan Johnson, JR Giddens, Gerald Green.  Oh wait you're talking about non-Celtics players  ;D

But seriously though, I think it happens enough.  You say 3 years and are specifically talking about being cut, but I would use 4 years, as 1st round rookie contracts are 2 years guaranteed plus 2 one year team options before the player hits restricted free agency.  So going back 10 years, how many 1st round rookies didn't make it past 3-4 years in the league?

2006: 6 guys made it 3 years, 6 guys made it only 4 years
2007: 4 guys made it 3 years or less,5 guys made it only 4 years, 1 guy has never played
2008: 2 guys made it 3 years or less, 1 guy made it only 4 years
2009: 3 guys made it 3 years or less, 2 guys made it only 4 years
2010: 4 guys made it 3 years or less, 3 guys made it only 4 years
2011: 5 guys made it 3 years or less, 0 guys made it only 4 years*
2012: 5 guys made it 3 years or less, 24 guys haven't made it past 4 years! Oh wait I have to stop counting at this point.

*excluding foreigners who came over later like Jonas Valanciunas, Nikola Mirotic, etc.

It seems to me, depending on the year, anywhere from 10% to 40% of first rounders don't make it past 4 years in the league (though I'd say the average is probably closer to 15-20%).  And then we have a variety of reasons of why that happens.

In some cases you have injuries (Jonny Flynn, Greg Oden) or other issues (Royce White, Javaris Crittenton) keeping a player from playing, but on the flip side you have a lot of 10 day contracts keeping a player in the league to even get up to or past 3-4 years at all (DJ White, Terrence Williams, Elliot Williams, Jordan Hamilton, etc.).  Some times a players contract is just allowed to run out and/or the team option isn't picked up (Joe Alexander, Patrick O'Bryant), other times he's shipped around the league as trade filler, and some just happen to have a dad whose a GM.

Again, I know you specifically said players being cut on rookie contracts, so already we may be talking about apples and oranges here.  I'm just saying I would broaden that criteria a little, and a decent amount of teams would have "wasted" a first rounder on a player that they ended up getting little-to-no value from.
I said and meant 3 years, because as you say you are guaranteed 2 and almost always given the 3rd (and in the slightly older days you were guaranteed 3).  But being cut and not being renewed are not anywhere near the same thing.  It is extremely rare for a 1st round pick to not make it to 3 years.  Even terrible players almost always get 3 years.  The fact that Boston has so many players that don't, goes to show Ainge is not nearly the drafter he is made out to be, especially recently, where he has consistently missed.  It is one of the main reasons I wanted him to trade the pick so much last summer.  I just have no confidence in his drafting ability, none at all.  I hope Brown works out, but the shear fact that Ainge took him, doesn't bode well in my mind, especially given where he was projected by virtually everyone else.  Ainge just doesn't have the track record, especially recently, of proving everyone wrong. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip