Ford 4.0

[Ilikesports17]

I think the analysis of Tatum is really funny.

Hes an 87% free throw shooter.

His shots gonna be fine.

Id take him 3rd (ahead of Lonzo Ball whom I do not like)

[hwangjini_1]

Next year's starting 5:

IT
Butler
Brown
Jackson
Horford
Zizic.

Is the nba expanding the court's width to accomadate the new 6 on 6 format? 

no. other teams still play 5 players. but the celtics get 6. championship #18, here we come!!! 

[hwangjini_1]

I've been watching a bunch of Josh Jackson today and I've kind of fallen in love with the idea of him and Jaylen starting together as comb-forwards and laying waste to the league. Jaylen with his flattop and Jackson with that fro. Jackson is skinny but he seems wiry. He's also got the trifecta: high motor, high IQ, great athleticism. Get him to Crowder and Bradley's shot coach and call it a day.

Fultz is still the most impressive to me but I'd be happy if the Celtics wind up with Jackson. Maybe even over Ball.

My concern with Jackson is what they wrote above: I've always read that FT% is the best indicator of NBA field goal shooting.

Much as Danny likes the gritty guys who can't shoot, we need points.

Mike

you must have missed his pick of yabasele and zizic. both have very good fg% and yabasele can certainly shoot 3 pointers well.

maybe you mean another danny ainge. 

[Ilikesports17]

I've been watching a bunch of Josh Jackson today and I've kind of fallen in love with the idea of him and Jaylen starting together as comb-forwards and laying waste to the league. Jaylen with his flattop and Jackson with that fro. Jackson is skinny but he seems wiry. He's also got the trifecta: high motor, high IQ, great athleticism. Get him to Crowder and Bradley's shot coach and call it a day.

Fultz is still the most impressive to me but I'd be happy if the Celtics wind up with Jackson. Maybe even over Ball.

My concern with Jackson is what they wrote above: I've always read that FT% is the best indicator of NBA field goal shooting.

Much as Danny likes the gritty guys who can't shoot, we need points.

Mike

you must have missed his pick of yabasele and zizic. both have very good fg% and yabasele can certainly shoot 3 pointers well.

maybe you mean another danny ainge. 

Zizic is a center.

The biggest knocks on Ainge's last three top picks were shooting(Smart, Brown, Rozier) also the last two "shooters" hes taken have turned out not to be able to actually shoot (Hunter and Young) although Young is shooting well lately hes still 28% from deep in his career.

[mef730]

I've been watching a bunch of Josh Jackson today and I've kind of fallen in love with the idea of him and Jaylen starting together as comb-forwards and laying waste to the league. Jaylen with his flattop and Jackson with that fro. Jackson is skinny but he seems wiry. He's also got the trifecta: high motor, high IQ, great athleticism. Get him to Crowder and Bradley's shot coach and call it a day.

Fultz is still the most impressive to me but I'd be happy if the Celtics wind up with Jackson. Maybe even over Ball.

My concern with Jackson is what they wrote above: I've always read that FT% is the best indicator of NBA field goal shooting.

Much as Danny likes the gritty guys who can't shoot, we need points.

Mike

you must have missed his pick of yabasele and zizic. both have very good fg% and yabasele can certainly shoot 3 pointers well.

maybe you mean another danny ainge. 

No, I'm only talking about the players that are copacetic with my theory. Yabu and Zizic don't count.



Mike

[Quetzalcoatl]

I've been watching a bunch of Josh Jackson today and I've kind of fallen in love with the idea of him and Jaylen starting together as comb-forwards and laying waste to the league. Jaylen with his flattop and Jackson with that fro. Jackson is skinny but he seems wiry. He's also got the trifecta: high motor, high IQ, great athleticism. Get him to Crowder and Bradley's shot coach and call it a day.

Fultz is still the most impressive to me but I'd be happy if the Celtics wind up with Jackson. Maybe even over Ball.

TP.  After watching Brown at the 2 though, I kind of want them starting as our SG and SF instead of our SF and PF.  As the league goes smaller, I feel like we'd have a huge advantage there.  But I suppose that does make me sound like Isiah Thomas http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/05/06/isiah-thomas-eddy-curry-trade-wfan/

[footey]

Why do I get the feeling that this class is overhyped?

two reasons:

1. Has been considered a strong draft as early as last year, as compared to the 2016 draft.
2. We are guaranteed a top 4 pick, and have the greatest change of all 30 teams (25%) to get the number 1 pick. So needless to say, folks on this site are going to hype the heck out of it!!

[clevelandceltic]

I think the analysis of Tatum is really funny.

Hes an 87% free throw shooter.

His shots gonna be fine.

Id take him 3rd (ahead of Lonzo Ball whom I do not like)

Well that's why I think its funny. They highlight his finishing at the rim which I view as more of a weak point and they have concerns about his shooting which I dont. When I look at the guys before him on this list I think someone is going to get fired if these are the concerns because guys like Issac have much bigger issues like assertiveness and a frame that might not add alot of weight.

[hwangjini_1]

I've been watching a bunch of Josh Jackson today and I've kind of fallen in love with the idea of him and Jaylen starting together as comb-forwards and laying waste to the league. Jaylen with his flattop and Jackson with that fro. Jackson is skinny but he seems wiry. He's also got the trifecta: high motor, high IQ, great athleticism. Get him to Crowder and Bradley's shot coach and call it a day.

Fultz is still the most impressive to me but I'd be happy if the Celtics wind up with Jackson. Maybe even over Ball.

My concern with Jackson is what they wrote above: I've always read that FT% is the best indicator of NBA field goal shooting.

Much as Danny likes the gritty guys who can't shoot, we need points.

Mike

you must have missed his pick of yabasele and zizic. both have very good fg% and yabasele can certainly shoot 3 pointers well.

maybe you mean another danny ainge. 

No, I'm only talking about the players that are copacetic with my theory. Yabu and Zizic don't count.



Mike

ha, ha...a tp for impeccable logic. 

[chilidawg]

I've been watching a bunch of Josh Jackson today and I've kind of fallen in love with the idea of him and Jaylen starting together as comb-forwards and laying waste to the league. Jaylen with his flattop and Jackson with that fro. Jackson is skinny but he seems wiry. He's also got the trifecta: high motor, high IQ, great athleticism. Get him to Crowder and Bradley's shot coach and call it a day.

Fultz is still the most impressive to me but I'd be happy if the Celtics wind up with Jackson. Maybe even over Ball.

TP.  After watching Brown at the 2 though, I kind of want them starting as our SG and SF instead of our SF and PF.  As the league goes smaller, I feel like we'd have a huge advantage there.  But I suppose that does make me sound like Isiah Thomas http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/05/06/isiah-thomas-eddy-curry-trade-wfan/

The great thing about them is that you can go big with them at the 2/3 or small at the 3/4.  Versatility is so valuable.

[Big333223]

I've been watching a bunch of Josh Jackson today and I've kind of fallen in love with the idea of him and Jaylen starting together as comb-forwards and laying waste to the league. Jaylen with his flattop and Jackson with that fro. Jackson is skinny but he seems wiry. He's also got the trifecta: high motor, high IQ, great athleticism. Get him to Crowder and Bradley's shot coach and call it a day.

Fultz is still the most impressive to me but I'd be happy if the Celtics wind up with Jackson. Maybe even over Ball.

My concern with Jackson is what they wrote above: I've always read that FT% is the best indicator of NBA field goal shooting.

Much as Danny likes the gritty guys who can't shoot, we need points.

Mike

I feel exactly the same. His form isn't great on jump shots either, even though he's made a decent percentage of college 3's. If his form can be improved, maybe that means he can become a more reliable shooter.

[Celtics4ever]

My concern with Jackson is what they wrote above: I've always read that FT% is the best indicator of NBA field goal shooting.

51% from the field and 37% from the trey is not bad.   Yeah his FT is poor at 56% but he can make in the game where he is moving.   Its rare but I have seen guys who were better shooting on the move because they don't think about their shot then, at the Free throw line they thought too much and killed their %.

[droopdog7]

If there's disagreement about the top 3 it could help us in two ways. We might get the guy we want at a lower slot. Or, if we have #1 or #2 we can trade down a slot and still get who we want.

We might have to trade up a slot or two if other teams think the same thing, of course. But I think Danny will play things close to the vest, while some other GMs seem less shy about announcing their intentions.

Trading to move down a slot is basically impossible isn't it?

Celtics (#1): hey Lakers, we know you really want Ball so why don't you trade up to make sure you get him?

Lakers (#2): wait, why would you be trading down unless you didn't want Ball? We'll just pick him at #2.

Celtics: oh.

That actually happened a couple of places in the 2006 draft re Aldridge and Thomas, as well as Foy and Roy.

Yes, and in 1993 when Orlando moved Webber (#1) for Penny (#3) and three first rounders.

Except that Webber was the consensus #1 pick.  In this case, we're asking the lakers to move up to pick a player that may fall in their lap regardless. 

The way I see it, if we want to draft fultz and land at #1 then don't get cute.  It gets trickier of course if we want to draft Jackson (and are at #1). 

[86MaxwellSmart]

Next year's starting 5:

IT
Butler
Brown
Jackson
Horford
Zizic.

Is the nba expanding the court's width to accomadate the new 6 on 6 format? 

no. other teams still play 5 players. but the celtics get 6. championship #18, here we come!!! 

Hey--it worked for Portland in 2008

[saltlover]

If there's disagreement about the top 3 it could help us in two ways. We might get the guy we want at a lower slot. Or, if we have #1 or #2 we can trade down a slot and still get who we want.

We might have to trade up a slot or two if other teams think the same thing, of course. But I think Danny will play things close to the vest, while some other GMs seem less shy about announcing their intentions.

Trading to move down a slot is basically impossible isn't it?

Celtics (#1): hey Lakers, we know you really want Ball so why don't you trade up to make sure you get him?

Lakers (#2): wait, why would you be trading down unless you didn't want Ball? We'll just pick him at #2.

Celtics: oh.

That actually happened a couple of places in the 2006 draft re Aldridge and Thomas, as well as Foy and Roy.

Yes, and in 1993 when Orlando moved Webber (#1) for Penny (#3) and three first rounders.

Except that Webber was the consensus #1 pick.  In this case, we're asking the lakers to move up to pick a player that may fall in their lap regardless. 

The way I see it, if we want to draft fultz and land at #1 then don't get cute.  It gets trickier of course if we want to draft Jackson (and are at #1).

You've pretty much got it right.  I was listening to the trade deadline podcast on the Vertical, and the thing that struck me most was a comment Scal made, in reference to deals that didn't happen, was how much the Celtics love Fultz.  Scal was saying that the front office can't stop talking about him -- he's their guy.  Scal didn't talk about Ball or Jackson or anyone else -- for all I know the only prospect he knows is Fultz, because that's the only name that's being talked about in the Garden.  The comment from Scal also pretty much came out of nowhere -- they weren't discussing the draft at the time.  He just needed to say how much the Celtics love Fultz to add context to the discussion.

Anyway, if the Celtics pick first, they're not going to play games with that pick.  Fultz is their guy, and I don't see anyone moving above him.  Now is it possible someone else wants Fultz at least as much, and a trade can be worked out? Sure.  But trading down a spot or two just because?  I think there's a pretty big gap in the Celtics' minds between Fultz and whomever is #2 on their board.