Guy scores 19 points once, and he's a good pick over guys who are legit stars in the league? There's a term for this: rationalization.
That's not an argument that anyone here is making. No one is saying that taking him was better than taking the Greek Freak. Nor are people saying that just this one game is what makes him a good pick.
Pretty much every non-top 10 draft pick (and many in the top 10) has a better player selected after them. This shouldn't be a surprise: most later picks are either going for a safe bet (like Olynyk) or swinging for the fences (like the Greek Freak or Bruno Caboclo). With 47 picks after Olynyk for potential "swing for the fences" picks, some are going to be hits. That's just basic statistics. There's no guarantee on picks like Giannis. Sometimes they work out, but most of the time you end up with a bust. You can't compare a safe pick vs a risky one without considering the chance of them being a bust. Danny chose to play it safe instead of taking a risk, and got a good player out of it. It wasn't the best possible outcome, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a good outcome.
And nobody is saying that Kelly is good based on this one game. Last year, he shot 40.5% on 3.0 3PA/game, good for 14th in the NBA, and best among big men (unless you could Omri Casspi or Doug McDermott as big men, but they mostly play SF). Like him or not, his 3 point shot is a definite weapon, and when you combine it with his decent perimeter defense (which is rare for a stretch big, although his lack of interior defense is pretty typical), you have a player that, while not a star, is a reliable rotation piece that any team would love to bring off the bench, and that quite a few teams picking ahead of us (Cleveland, Sacramento, Utah, Philly if they hadn't traded MCW) would likely have preferred to their own picks. In a redraft, Kelly would have gone at the same spot or higher, which is the definition of a good pick
Nice post, I particularly like the bolded points ^^^
You think the last two bolded sections are correct? I think that's one soft definition of success. It wasn't even close to the best possible outcome.
I'm just responding to the question "is it safe to say KO was a good pick by Ainge now"
It all hinges on definition of "good pick".
The OP didn't ask "is it safe to say Ainge knocked the pick out of park with KO?"
The Greek Freak is, what, arguably the best pick in that draft, right? If Ainge had picked the Greek Freak, it would have been arguably the best draft pick ever made by Ainge. He didn't. He picked KO. Was it a good pick? Yes.
Man, I wish people would stop hiding behind Giannis as this anomaly that no one could have predicted.....
What do Giannis, Denis, and Rudy have in common?
1) They were all taken after Kelly;
2) They're all younger than Kelly;
3) They're all better than Kelly;
4) They all have higher ceilings than Kelly;
5) They all played in Europe before being drafted.
The Celtics failed to scout these players properly. Oh, and Crabbe and Dieng could also be considered better players by many (though I'd rather have KO than GD).
So giving Ainge a pat on the back for the Olynyk pick is weak. He's a lottery pick. He's not a bust. You get a "B" for that.
What do Lucas Nogueira, Sergey Karasev, Livio Jean-Charles, Nemanja Nedovic, and Alex Abrines all have in common?
1) They were all taken after Kelly;
2) They're all younger than Kelly;
3) They're all
better than Kelly out of the NBA;
4) They all had higher ceilings than Kelly;
5) They all played
in Europe internationally before being drafted.
Just as with any draft picks, foreign players are unknown quantities. Some work out (like Giannis, Schroeder, and Gobert), but a lot of them don't (like Nogueria, Karasev, Jean-Charles, Nedovic, and Abrines). You keep acting like Giannis and the others were can;t miss prospects, but they weren't. If they were obvious picks, they would have gone much, much sooner. Just look back at their draft profiles from before the draft: Giannis was a 6'9" athletic specimen, but had little experience and played in the Greek 2nd division, which is extremely weak. Gobert had great size, but there were tons of questions about whether he'd be able to fill out his frame enough to play down low in the NBA. Similarly, Karasev was considered "among the most intriguing international prospects in this draft" and "years ahead of the learning curve of the average 19 year-old European prospect", but is now out of the NBA and playing back in Russia. You'll find similar stuff if you look at any of the other foreign players' profiles. All of the international picks were risks: acting like Giannis, Schroeder, and Gobert were sure things and obvious picks is just untrue.