Author Topic: Who Do You Take At #5?  (Read 9062 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #45 on: March 28, 2017, 11:48:59 AM »

Offline boscel33

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2667
  • Tommy Points: 166
Flashback to 2007 -- Celts have great odds at a top pick, but end up with #5, out of range of the most exciting prospects.


The one difference is, if the Nets end up with the worst record, the C's cannot fall any further than 4.

That said, at #4 I take the Jackson/Tatum leftover, assuming Fultz/Ball are gone. 

If the Nets fall out and we hit 5, then I probably lean Monk, but MARKKANEN and ISAAC could be intriguing and fill a need.
"There's sharks and minnows in this world. If you don't know which you are, you ain't a shark."

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #46 on: March 28, 2017, 11:51:40 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33431
  • Tommy Points: 1532
nbadraft.net has Fox going 4 and Tatum available at 5.  Of course they have Jackson going 1 followed by Ball and Fultz, so a bit difficult to take that one seriously.

It's interesting how any site that deviates from the herd mentality is mocked.  Personally I think that's about how I would have it, probably Fultz ahead of Ball though.
Fultz appears to me to be the best player in this draft.  I might agree that Jackson has a bit more top end potential, but I think Fultz is far more likely to reach his potential and Fultz is the most likely to not bust out as well.  Fultz should be the 1st pick in the draft for those reasons. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

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

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #47 on: March 28, 2017, 11:58:45 AM »

Offline Darío SpanishFan

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 981
  • Tommy Points: 141
Flashback to 2007 -- Celts have great odds at a top pick, but end up with #5, out of range of the most exciting prospects.


The one difference is, if the Nets end up with the worst record, the C's cannot fall any further than 4.

That said, at #4 I take the Jackson/Tatum leftover, assuming Fultz/Ball are gone. 

If the Nets fall out and we hit 5, then I probably lean Monk, but MARKKANEN and ISAAC could be intriguing and fill a need.

Can anyone explain the main differences between Olynyk and Markkanen? A more regular version of Kelly, avoiding the silly fouls and keeping his virtues (shooting, fake moves, Euro step) would be a good fit.

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #48 on: March 28, 2017, 04:23:26 PM »

Offline GreenShooter

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1177
  • Tommy Points: 87
Flashback to 2007 -- Celts have great odds at a top pick, but end up with #5, out of range of the most exciting prospects.


The one difference is, if the Nets end up with the worst record, the C's cannot fall any further than 4.

That said, at #4 I take the Jackson/Tatum leftover, assuming Fultz/Ball are gone. 

If the Nets fall out and we hit 5, then I probably lean Monk, but MARKKANEN and ISAAC could be intriguing and fill a need.

Can anyone explain the main differences between Olynyk and Markkanen? A more regular version of Kelly, avoiding the silly fouls and keeping his virtues (shooting, fake moves, Euro step) would be a good fit.
The hair man, the hair!

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #49 on: March 29, 2017, 07:04:54 PM »

Offline vjcsmoke

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3173
  • Tommy Points: 182
Actually the worst we can pick is #4.  I don't understand the who would you pick at #5 question.

I'm guessing that our guy is Fultz.  If he's not there then it gets murky.

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #50 on: March 29, 2017, 07:31:06 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
If the Nets somehow, miraculously, win 6 games or more out of their final 8 games while LA goes 0-for the rest of the season(not gonna happen), then the player I am taking at #5 is the player that the team who trades for the fifth pick tells me to select because I am not keeping that pick.

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #51 on: March 29, 2017, 07:35:45 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
If the Nets somehow, miraculously, win 6 games or more out of their final 8 games while LA goes 0-for the rest of the season(not gonna happen), then the player I am taking at #5 is the player that the team who trades for the fifth pick tells me to select because I am not keeping that pick.
This.
I like some of the prospects like Fox and Markannen, but if we don't get a top 4 pick then I'm not too interested.
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #52 on: March 29, 2017, 09:06:08 PM »

Offline Cman

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13068
  • Tommy Points: 120
Actually the worst we can pick is #4.  I don't understand the who would you pick at #5 question.

Even if Phoenix and LA tank for the rest of the games and the Nets screw us by winning out?
Celtics fan for life.

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #53 on: April 10, 2017, 12:57:48 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
I just wanna say how relieved I am that this thread topic has become irrelevant.


Although we could still end up at #4 and perhaps Ainge ends up taking somebody outside of what looks like a pretty well established top 4 from my point of view.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #54 on: April 10, 2017, 01:08:06 PM »

Offline drogbagarnett

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 386
  • Tommy Points: 37
I just wanna say how relieved I am that this thread topic has become irrelevant.


Although we could still end up at #4 and perhaps Ainge ends up taking somebody outside of what looks like a pretty well established top 4 from my point of view.

Curious to know who is in your "pretty well established" top 4...??

To me anything other than Markelle or Josh would be a little disappointment... Who is the fourth name I should be happy with (assuming you have Ball in your top 4, I personally dont like how he fits with us...)

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #55 on: April 10, 2017, 02:07:01 PM »

Online celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15718
  • Tommy Points: 1386
This was a pretty unnecessary panic thread. Glad to see it is retired already.

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #56 on: April 11, 2017, 01:14:41 AM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6969
  • Tommy Points: 466
I just wanna say how relieved I am that this thread topic has become irrelevant.


Although we could still end up at #4 and perhaps Ainge ends up taking somebody outside of what looks like a pretty well established top 4 from my point of view.

Curious to know who is in your "pretty well established" top 4...??

To me anything other than Markelle or Josh would be a little disappointment... Who is the fourth name I should be happy with (assuming you have Ball in your top 4, I personally dont like how he fits with us...)
The fourth guy is Tatum, who I agree is in the top tier. There is a minority of people that have him higher than everyone but Fultz.  The intriguing thing for me is that he is younger than someone like Jackson.  Youth equals potential.

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #57 on: April 11, 2017, 01:17:51 AM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
This was a pretty unnecessary panic thread. Glad to see it is retired already.

Oh, come on, Clay.  There was a fairly significant chance of the Nets not ending up with sole possession of the worst record in the league, which would open the door for #5.

It was worth discussing, and was by no means a "panic" thread.  I felt it was interesting to discuss, because to me it seems like there's a clear top 4 in this draft and after that I'm not sure who I'd take.

Given the fact that not everybody agrees on that top 4, this is still a valid discussion since the Celts could very well end up with pick #3 or 4.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #58 on: April 11, 2017, 01:18:33 AM »

Offline CelticsElite

  • NCE
  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10774
  • Tommy Points: 789
I just wanna say how relieved I am that this thread topic has become irrelevant.


Although we could still end up at #4 and perhaps Ainge ends up taking somebody outside of what looks like a pretty well established top 4 from my point of view.

Curious to know who is in your "pretty well established" top 4...??

To me anything other than Markelle or Josh would be a little disappointment... Who is the fourth name I should be happy with (assuming you have Ball in your top 4, I personally dont like how he fits with us...)
The fourth guy is Tatum, who I agree is in the top tier. There is a minority of people that have him higher than everyone but Fultz.  The intriguing thing for me is that he is younger than someone like Jackson.  Youth equals potential.
in some espn mocks, they have monk at 4th and smith 5th, above tatum

I disagree with espn there

Re: Who Do You Take At #5?
« Reply #59 on: April 11, 2017, 05:51:39 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
If team was getting Hayward and losing KO would Markkanen be in the conversation at 4?